nanog mailing list archives
RE: FBI is at it again
From: alex () yuriev com
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:51:32 -0500 (EST)
Daniel,
Are you kidding? The problems with this are numerous. First, the source is Fox News, which is about a half step up from the Drudge Report. Secondly, what is the basis for believing that this is even possible? I am unaware of any technology that would allow all internet traffic to be proxied through a single location.
Unfortunately, just because we know how difficult it is to provide a solution to this problem, does not mean that everyone subscribes to it. One should not discount the argument made based purely on the source, especially since recently a few very "interesting" articles showed up in a number of publications, including current issue of Forbes. The author, whose name escapes me at this time, is under the ill-belief that since the internet traffic does flow though hubs, it would be possible to intercept it and store it on the computers located in those hubs. It is more likely that a white paper describing the issues arising from attempts to intercept and store that much data would do better than an argument about unreliability of the source. Alex --
Current thread:
- FBI is at it again Larry Diffey (Oct 26)
- Re: FBI is at it again Brian (Oct 26)
- Re: FBI is at it again Adam Herscher (Oct 27)
- RE: FBI is at it again Tom Thomas (Oct 27)
- Re: FBI is at it again batz (Oct 27)
- Re: FBI is at it again Lucy E. Lynch (Oct 28)
- RE: FBI is at it again Daniel Golding (Oct 29)
- Re: FBI is at it again Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 29)
- RE: FBI is at it again alex (Oct 29)
- Re: FBI is at it again Wojtek Zlobicki (Oct 29)
- Re: FBI is at it again Vadim Antonov (Oct 29)
- RE: FBI is at it again Paul Wouters (Oct 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: FBI is at it again herb (Oct 26)
- Re: FBI is at it again Steven M. Bellovin (Oct 29)
- Re: FBI is at it again Gordon Cook (Oct 29)
- Re: FBI is at it again Christian Kuhtz (Oct 29)
