Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russian Cops to Monitor All Internet Traffic

Posted by Roblimo on from the nothing-but-technology-has-changed-since-the-czars dept.

st. augustine writes "Just like the bad old days, only now with IP: according to this article in Mother Jones, Russian ISPs are now being required to provide -- and pay for -- 'black boxes' that copy all traffic to KGB, er, FSB headquarters. The big news is that now not only the FSB but 'seven other federal security agencies, including the tax police and the interior ministry,' are going to be given access. Hope that Russian crypto is as good as they say it is."

2 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Re:*We're* not there yet... by MrHat · · Score: 4

    Everytime something is unconstitutional, they nix it.

    That magical place called the judicial branch doesn't always nix these things on their own. The opinions of representatives have always been at least partially influenced by their constituients (that is, the voting body or state/city responsible for electing them). An apathetic attitude of "they'll fix it for me" is one of the first steps toward governmental control. If citizens don't control things, the gov't will have to.

    Those legislations are the equivalent of not allowing nudity on television.

    Now, about the porn thing - I firmly believe that viewing porn at a public library or school is a little (ahem) outside the realm of free speech. This is a reasonable limitation of expression - I wouldn't do it, and would probably be a bit dismayed if people could. The language in the bill, however, is much broader than this. The bill calls for a local determination of "decent", differing from site to site. What's legal at one location may not be at another, and local/corporate interests could easily make their way into the filtering. Even worse, locations may just rely on some NetNanny crap that filters out all pages with the word "breast" in it. Anyway, how hard is it to simply prohibit using public computing resources to display things defined as pornography? For enforcement, employ the human nodes - if Joe Schmo views porno at his library, Joe is asked to leave. Debates as to what porno is would be relatively rare, especially if libraries drafted a quick policy on what porno is and isn't. These restrictions on intrusive "indecency" are a good thing - the definition of "decent" needs to be limited and tightened up. Nudity is on my television alot (HBO). It's voluntary, though, and within my definition of good taste. (Okay, so HBO was a bad example ... heh...)

    ...to protect kids against pron

    "Protection" of kids is a very gray area, infinitely granular depending upon the circumstances. I've known parents who abhor violence yet accept nudity and even to a certain extent pornography. Even a certain kind of pornography. I'm trying to tread lightly here, but I really do believe in a minimum of involuntary governmental control and a delegation of this authority to parents. What about those without responsible parents? There needs to be governmental aid and assistance, but on an as-needed basis. Wait for a parent ask for specific limitations on Internet access for their children - it shouldn't be forced down everyone's throats.

    I probably left a bunch of holes in this, but there's a pretty simple central idea - there are easier answers to fostering control over indecency than federal restrictions and mandatory purchases of approved "filters". Those of us with good judgement shouldn't be forced to use some "filter" instead.

  2. *We're* not there yet... by MrHat · · Score: 5

    ...but not far removed, either. If you take a look at the EFF site, there's a link to H.R. 1501, the Juvenile Justice Bill. If you remember the CDA, this should be old hat.


    Exhibit A:
    SEC. 1402. NO UNIVERSAL SERVICE FOR SCHOOLS OR LIBRARIES THAT FAIL TO IMPLEMENT A FILTERING OR BLOCKING TECHNOLOGY FOR COMPUTERS WITH INTERNET ACCESS.

    Exhibit B:
    Senate version, 401-406 - formation of industry cartel to restrict access to First Amendment-protected content that some find offensive.

    Exhibit C:
    Senate version, Section 1504 - mandatory ISP provision of filters


    Yeah, we're not logging it yet. BFD. Prohibiting information from libraries/public institutions and forcing private companies to comply is a giant step toward Russia's situation. In fact, logging that information is the next logical step toward compliance with censorship. Before we sit back and laugh at Russia, let's take a good look here at home (in the US).