Home page logo
/

interesting-people logo Interesting People mailing list archives

more on Sounding the alarm on government mandated data retention
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 16:44:43 -0400



Begin forwarded message:

From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Date: April 29, 2006 4:42:51 PM EDT
To: lauren () vortex com
Cc: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Sounding the alarm on government mandated data retention

Lauren,

Thanks for your kind remarks about my article for CNET News.com. It's interesting that you say if we "don't take a stand now, we are likely to see the wonders of the Net repurposed into shackles that have the potential to undermine the very basis of our fundamental freedoms."

It does seem bizarre that we had such a public outcry about the Justice Department trying to obtain some information from Google. But now that we have the Justice Department proposing something far broader -- and *actual legislation* afoot in the U.S. Congress, with a floor vote perhaps next Wednesday -- nobody seems to be paying attention.

I first wrote about the Justice Department shopping around this proposal nearly a year ago:
http://news.com.com/Your+ISP+as+Net+watchdog/2100-1028_3-5748649.html

And then wrote an update a few weeks ago:
http://news.com.com/ISP+snooping+gaining+support/ 2100-1028_3-6061187.html

And we've published two articles since then:
http://news.com.com/U.S.+attorney+general+calls+for+reasonable+data +retention/2100-1030_3-6063185.html http://news.com.com/Congress+may+consider+mandatory+ISP+snooping/ 2100-1028_3-6066608.html

But doing a search for "data retention" coupled with "Gonzales" on Google News turns up only four hits, three of them our News.com articles and the fourth a blog entry that links to News.com.

Where's the other coverage and broader concern? My June 2005 article about the DoJ's statements in a private meeting took digging, true, but the more recent articles are based on _public statements_ by top Bush administration officials including Gonzales, Chertoff, and Mueller, and _actual legislation_ that's published on a House of Representatives web site.

Perhaps people are waiting until data retention requirements becomes law before they'll take it seriously?

-Declan



David Farber forwarded Lauren's message:
Recently here in IP, I commented on Attorny General Gonazales' comments
on data retention, and the alarming slippery slope that I feel this
represented:
http://lists.elistx.com/archives/interesting-people/200604/ msg00134.html
Now, Declan has noted in an article:
http://news.com.com/Congress+may+consider+mandatory+ISP+snooping/ 2100-1028_3-6066608.html?tag=st_lh that a Democratic Congresswoman is proposing to fast-track a bill or
ammendment to *require* essentially permanent retention of users'
Internet activity data (until at *least* one year after the user
*closes their account*).  For long-term users, this means effectively
permanent retention.
[...remainder snipped...]


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
  • more on Sounding the alarm on government mandated data retention David Farber (Apr 30)
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault