nanog mailing list archives
Re: is this true or... ?
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () research att com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:16:00 -0500
In message <20030328144042.4576C7B4D () berkshire research att com>, "Steven M. Be llovin" writes:
In message <A44DA7EDD8262343B02C64AF7E063A077CCC1D () kenya ba tronet sk>, "Tomas Daniska" writes:http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8595freedom-to-tinker.com, which is the source cited by your link, is indeed Ed Felten's. And I trust Ed.
It's been pointed out to me that the Texas bill, at least (I found it at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/cqcgi?CQ_SESSION_KEY=NUTHYMWBJWUF&CQ_QUERY_HANDLE=126838&CQ_CUR_DOCUMENT=4&CQ_SAVE[bill_number]=HB02121INT&CQ_TLO_DOC_TEXT=YES but there may be session state -- it's bill HB 2121) only criminalizes the conduct if it's done "with intent to harm or defraud a communications service provider". Now, given the anti-NAT and anti-VPN tendencies of some broadband ISPs, I'm not necessarily thrilled, but it's not quite the same as was originally suggested. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)
Current thread:
- is this true or... ? Tomas Daniska (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Jack Bates (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Scott W Brim (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Richard Irving (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? batz (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Sean Donelan (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Richard Irving (Mar 28)
- Re: is this true or... ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 28)