«

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6077654.html

"" Two proposals to mandate data retention have surfaced in the U.S.
Congress. One, backed by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, says
that any Internet service that "enables users to access content" must
permanently retain records that would permit police to identify each user.
The records could only be discarded at least one year after the user's
account was closed. ""


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

Have A Nice Cup of Tea wrote:
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6077654.html
>
> "" Two proposals to mandate data retention have surfaced in the U.S.
> Congress. One, backed by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, says
> that any Internet service that "enables users to access content" must
> permanently retain records that would permit police to identify each user.
> The records could only be discarded at least one year after the user's
> account was closed. ""
>
>
> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>

I sometimes think these guys have shares in EMC....(or some such storage
company).

I think the paranoia is getting to them....

To store a URL against each user, with a legally provable link, time
stamp etc in a device that can be of legally proven security so it
stands up in a court of law......we are talking terabytes upon terabytes
of useless data stored on expensive solutions....then trying to search
and collate it.

FFS what for? spend billions.....for diddly squat....you might be able
to prove the odd link is useful....if you can find it amongst the
garbage, which is unlikey...It would taken some decent servers to run a
database to look at the data.....

USA looks more and more likely to implode, they are running around like
headless chickens, trying to look like they are doing something to
protect their citizens, the fact it is in-effective shows how little
they understand the Internet and data....they are running scared.......

regards

Thing

thingy wrote:

> I think the paranoia is getting to them....
>
> To store a URL against each user, with a legally provable link, time
> stamp etc in a device that can be of legally proven security so it
> stands up in a court of law......we are talking terabytes upon terabytes
> of useless data stored on expensive solutions....then trying to search
> and collate it.
>

You also have to assume that there was any INTENT to access the URL.

One way webmasters could scupper this is to place a pop-up for Al Jazeera on
EVERY home page.

It opens whether you want it to or not. Your browser may not show it.....but
the network will record the fact it was requested.

Have A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:

>http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6077654.html
>
>"" Two proposals to mandate data retention have surfaced in the U.S.
>Congress. One, backed by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, says
>that any Internet service that "enables users to access content" must
>permanently retain records that would permit police to identify each user.
>The records could only be discarded at least one year after the user's
>account was closed. ""
>
>
>Have A Nice Cup of Tea

Didn't the British go down this road a year or two ago??

On Sun, 28 May 2006 22:01:25 +1200, thingy wrote:

> they are running scared.

What is there for the USA to be scared about?

That is, other than the fact that most of the world loathes the USA for
how it's been meddling in the internal affairs of other nations!


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

s.te.v.e. wrote:
> thingy wrote:
>
>
>>I think the paranoia is getting to them....
>>
>>To store a URL against each user, with a legally provable link, time
>>stamp etc in a device that can be of legally proven security so it
>>stands up in a court of law......we are talking terabytes upon terabytes
>>of useless data stored on expensive solutions....then trying to search
>>and collate it.
>>
>
>
> You also have to assume that there was any INTENT to access the URL.

I assume by shear quantity...ie the odd accidental link to porn, OK
mistake.....10s of thousands of kiddie porn or how to make a nuke in
your backyard.......mind you so much of it is dynamic that it will be
really hard to prove....

> One way webmasters could scupper this is to place a pop-up for Al Jazeera on
> EVERY home page.

dont tempt me...

> It opens whether you want it to or not. Your browser may not show it.....but
> the network will record the fact it was requested.

regards

Thing

On Mon, 29 May 2006 08:22:31 +1200, Mutlley wrote:

> Have A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:
>
>>http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6077654.html
>>
>>"" Two proposals to mandate data retention have surfaced in the U.S.
>>Congress. One, backed by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, says
>>that any Internet service that "enables users to access content" must
>>permanently retain records that would permit police to identify each user.
>>The records could only be discarded at least one year after the user's
>>account was closed. ""
>
> Didn't the British go down this road a year or two ago??

Dunno. Wasn't paying so much attention about this back then.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

On Mon, 29 May 2006 19:18:27 +1200, thingy wrote:

>> One way webmasters could scupper this is to place a pop-up for Al Jazeera on
>> EVERY home page.
>
> dont tempt me...

Alas the American government would probably put something in the law which
would prevent ISPs from doing that.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

Have A Nice Cup of Tea wrote:
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 08:22:31 +1200, Mutlley wrote:
>
>
>>Have A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6077654.html
>>>
>>>"" Two proposals to mandate data retention have surfaced in the U.S.
>>>Congress. One, backed by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, says
>>>that any Internet service that "enables users to access content" must
>>>permanently retain records that would permit police to identify each user.
>>>The records could only be discarded at least one year after the user's
>>>account was closed. ""
>>
>>Didn't the British go down this road a year or two ago??
>
>
> Dunno. Wasn't paying so much attention about this back then.
>
>
> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>

I think it is a EU thing and not a UK thing.

regards

Thing