Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Reporting Little Blue Men
From: Dean Anderson <dean () av8 com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 19:19:54 -0500

At 7:55 PM -0500 1/22/98, Steve Sobol wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 1998 at 05:24:30PM -0500, Dean Anderson wrote:
These are crimminal statues, and apply to "providers of wire communications
services".

Read these:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2510.shtml
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2511.shtml

Cite legal precdents.

I presume you mean cases where this law has been applied. I will look that
up. But even if there were no cases, the law can still be applied to the
first person caught violating them.

I'm starting to feel like I have to seek out some spammers and help them
collect evidence for a crimminal complaint, in order to defend my honor, or
at least my sanity from claims to the contrary.

Perhaps those network providers who think (and flame) that it can't
possibly apply to their actual blocking, will send me the names and
netblocks of the spammers they are blocking. They should write that the
blocked packets are coming from a peer for which they have a peering
agreement with, and would otherwise be expected to transport those packets
to their destinations.  Write that the packets are blocked because they are
sent from spammers and contain spam. Or just write that they are blocked
for an arbitrary reason. I'll take the evidence and get a crimminal
complaint, thus either proving the application of the law.  Or disproving
it, beyond mere speculation.  "Put up or shut up", as it were.

I would also point out that the definition of "intercept" in 2510 is
substantially *looser* than the dictionary definition.  Just reading and
passing it on qualifies as an "intercept" according to 2510.  You don't
actually have to block it to be intercepting according to the law.  You're
making my point, while trying to disagree.

I might be wrong, but no one has yet given an explanation of how this law
doesn't apply. Claims that it only applies to phone companies seem to
definitely be wrong. But there is one way to find out for sure whether it
applies to anti-spammer network providers.

I'm not a spammer. Nor am I an anti-spammer. I'm for law and order;  Laws
that apply equally to everyone, and can't be violated without punishment
when it suits some private purpose or agenda.

I claim that crimminals are of low moral fibre, and I'm willing to test who
the crimminals really are.  I'll expect my postal mailbox to be full next
week: P.O. Box 7286, Nashua, NH 03060.  I expect to find letters from the
flamers.

                --Dean


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
           Plain Aviation, Inc                  dean () av8 com
           LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP          http://www.av8.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]