[212] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Special: Feds Continue Push For Mandated Internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Fri Jun 2 13:51:34 2006
Message-Id: <200606021644.k52Gi2ZQ003442@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:44:02 -0700
From: privacy@vortex.com
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-internet2jun02,0,622125.story?coll=la-home-headlines
"The Justice Department said Thursday that it was not seeking
to have the contents of e-mail archived, just information
about the websites people visit and those with whom they
correspond."
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000175.html
"Sounding the Alarm on Government-Mandated Data Retention"
Greetings. This is a critical topic. The impracticality and cost
issues associated with the new DOJ Internet data retention proposals
are relatively obvious. It's difficult to even understand who would
be required to comply with such demands. Only the big Web service
companies? ISPs? (via packet tracking of their subscribers running
their own servers?) Every small firm, organization, or even
individual who operate their own e-mail and Web servers? Are the
existing privacy policies of such entities instantly negated if they
conflict with the DOJ wish list or data retention legislation?
It's also obvious how e-mail contact information could be abused.
But there's something even more insidious in this situation. In the
recent DOJ vs. Google case, Google and most unbiased observers
correctly noted that "Web destinations" (URLs) frequently contain
all manner of personal and private information. Names, addresses,
social security numbers, dreams, hopes, interests, fears, medical
queries -- all manner of details of our lives are embedded in the
URLs we submit to search engines and other Web sites.
For all practical purposes, URLs in the Web context are very much
like the content of phone calls in the conventional telecom context,
judging by the level of detailed data that URLs provide and their
ability to allow complete tracking of our every related Internet
action in most cases.
If Internet users must live in fear that their actions on the Net are
subject to retrospective analysis -- not only based on today's
criteria but potentially on tomorrow's as well -- the effects on how
we view and use the Net will be drastic, with vast unintended
negative consequences that strike to the heart of our democracies.
This issue is ultimately more important than network neutrality,
Internet governance, or most (if not all) of the other
technically-related concerns that we bandy about here in IP or in
most other forums, because it strikes to the very core of basic
privacy concerns and personal freedoms.
Government-mandated Internet data retention could be the most potent
single technological move in recent history toward enabling future
tyranny against both individuals and groups.
We must not allow this issue to be "managed" through private
meetings requested by government officials, or as a mere footnote in
the public discourse or hastily passed legislation -- to be treated
as a fait accompli by this or future administrations.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com or lauren@pfir.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, IOIC
- International Open Internet Coalition - http://www.ioic.net
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
DayThink: http://daythink.vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
