Slashdot Mirror
DMCA Forces Cox To Censor Changelog?
Ross Vandegrift writes: "Alan Cox released 2.2.20pre10 today, which includes security fixes. He is refusing to indicate what security holes have been fixed, as Unix-style permissions could be used as an anti-circumvention device. The thread starts here. " It'd be great if people could read the threads here and try to figure out what is going on. I'm a little lost, but it looks like he's being overzealous.
Hey, remember that time Felten wrote a paper and couldn't release it cuz it was a circumvention device?
Or that time I wanted to play DVDs in Linux and couldn't because I needed a circumvention device?
Or when some Russian dude got locked up away from his family because he wanted to let blind people use eBooks?
Overzealous my ass. This is a problem and we need to take a stand, whether it's "reasonable" or not. People need to understand what is at stake - and what better way to help that process than by showing them?
Or maybe considering his past comments on not wanting to come to America anymore due to DMCA fears, he's just doing it to spark more debate. You know, get all the /. folks up in arms about the DMCA again and how it's keeping free information from being free. That'd be my guess, but YMMV.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
I stopped reading at this point.
It'd be great if people could read the threads here and try to figure out what is going on.
Unfortunately, it looks like the site might already be hosed. How about if we just speculate wildly, make irrational calls-to-action that will never commence, throw in a few anti-government rants, and top it all off with a good old fashion linux/bsd flamewar?
You know, the usual.
People. He's just using this humorous approach to show us how ridiculous the DMCA can be.
Loban Amaan Rahman ==> Anagram of ==> Aha! An Abnormal Man!
We can't bomb the RIAA et al so we'll have to resort to other methods of getting attention to have the DMCA reviewed. We could write letters until we are blue in the face but that isn't working.
I'm not sure if Alan's actions will get the attention it needs but it is certainly a step in the right direction.
I can't spell or type, but that doesn't mean I'm unusually stupid.
In related news today Senator Fritz Hollings, author of the SSSCA proposal, recanted stating:
"I just downloaded the latest 2.2.20pre10 and found censored changelogs! This will seriously impact my l33t hax0r activities. I finally see how my SSSSCA proposal will impact freedom. I am official withdrawing my proposal effective immeditely."
Apparently Alan Cox's plan to publicly demonstrate the absurdity of the DCMA and SSSCA in a place that would hit congress where it hurts has paid off.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the DMCA only apply in cases of devices meant to enforce copyright protection?
OTOH, the US outlawing something shouldn't mean that all these good things are suddenly no longer available to the rest of the world. We need a place to publish the things which are outlawed in the US, without getting prosecuted for publishing these things to the US.
Such a site has been started (well, not quite, but we're busy getting it up and running) and we hope there will soon be a place to publish crypto research, security information and other useful tools which are not allowed in the US. The only small gotcha is that in order to publish it legally, some kind of access controll will have to be put in place so US citizens cannot get at the archive. Unfortunate, but so be it.
The site? http://thefreeworld.net/
Is Dmitri not a legitimate programmer? I think he is. Dmtitri writes programs which are legal in his country. He has never written a program in the US which violates US law. What other test of legitimate is there?
Funny, I thought he was obeying the law.
Political ends are may be a side effect of that, and indeed this has all the writings of a political snub, but it's nevertheless undeniable that he would be commiting criminal acts by not making this pointed omission.
Alan needs to realize that, although the DMCA does have important and evil implications for the freedom to code and speak in the U.S., it would not be used against a legitimate programmer such as himself. The people who have been targeted by the DMCA have been crackers: people who defeat lame encryption schemes and distribute point-and-click software that allows the masses to pirate. Although I fully support 2600 and Dmitri in their efforts (I have been a security engineer and I appreciate the truly talented invididuals in the field), DeCSS and the PDF utility are simply not in the same class as the Linux kernel and the other software Cox has worked on. He is simply a non-target and he needs to stop pretending that the DMCA affects him.
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
it would not be used against a legitimate programmer such as himself
While it is unlikely that Alan would be arrested for fixing security bugs in the Linux kernel, he is quite right in saying that under the letter of the law, he might be. Even if you merely can be arrested for such an activity, then the DMCA is a bad law and must be repealed, or at least modified very substantially. So Alan should be applauded for taking a stand, even if (or exactly because!) that inconveniences some people temporarily.
As Bill Hicks said, "You are free... to do as we tell you". Right now, it seems that US "freedom" means the freedom to bribe (sorry, to fund...) senators et al to get your pet bills passed.
Imagine a law so stupid that civil obedience becomes an efficient way to fighting it...
Yup, he is preaching to the choir.
Thats not so bad though.
Just because we agree, doesn't mean we are doing anything about it. He is demonstrating how this can hit home, making it hit home.
The point of action and speach isn't always to change minds that disagree, sometimes it is to change minds that agree.... to align them more tightly, to galvanize them into action.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
The DMCA is only one of the many laws which make the USA into a police state. AC's intentions are good but he's got a lot more battles in front of him before the U.S. can be considered safe from authority abuse.
-CT
Sounds Republican to me.
I disagree. Republicans tend to not like business that deal in porn, etc, things they find morally offensive (however you feel like defining that).
And they certainly like the gov't when its enforcing the things they like.
Not that no unions, business is good, goverment bad is a good overview of libertarian policy either. Gov't isn't bad. Big, over intrusive gov't is bad (if you're a libertarian).
alan needs to take a man's stand and publish the logs....Matin Luther King jr did this sort of thing.....Alan needs to do this sort of thing....if he gets arrested how can the DA deamonise him to the jury?
DA: " He released information that broke the DMCA while trying to keep the Linux kernel secure!!!"
defence:" the nature of OSS is to show all changes. the linux kernel does not contain any copyprotected material, however, because of a baddly writen law, making the operating system secure from intruders is now illegal....does that seem right?"
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Firstly, he's a Brit. They have a sense of humour which is sometimes very subtle and is usually based on 'irony' (as in the saying something different to what you mean, rather than the more American 'Alanis Morissette' use of the word). Some Americans take ironic statements at face value, as is often seen on Slashdot.
Secondly, he's a clever guy. He's being stubborn about this to make a point. If he wasn't stubborn about it, the point wouldn't be made. He is acting correctly according to an unjust law to highlight the danger of it.
He is not being 'dumb' or deliberately annoying, he's highlighting the potential effects of a worrying development in the American legal which could have significant negative impact on all Open Source software developers.
No, it was correctly identified as Ex Post Facto. Statute of Limitations refers to the amount of time that may pass between the comission of a crime and the prosecution, however the law must have been in place at the time of the "incident" or no prosecution can take place.
I'm not sure how trying to retroactively remove the statute of limitations and retroactively declaring computer crimes as acts of terrorism will fly with the courts -- it could be argued that Ex Post Facto protects people from being branded as terrorists because their actions were not legally "acts of terrorism" when they occured. Not that Ashcroft seems to care about the Constitution one way or the other right now.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Ok, I'm a Canadian.
Inevitably, my traffic to/from thefreeworld.net is going to pass through US sites (well, it does, I just did a traceroute).
The same data are moving along wires in continental US. How is that different from the data being digested by eyeballs in the US? Will you have to draw this distinction?
Is this going to affect my ability as a Canadian to have access to your site?
Gotta love the inter[national]net...
-ben
myselfmusic
I used to be proud to be a Citizen of US. But it seems everyday that the "land of the Free" becomes a little less free. This is beginning to reach insane proportions. Everyday we seem to pass more and more laws that are seemingly(to me anyway) directly in conflict with Our Constitution. Our politicans don't listen to us anymore. I am disgusted...and angry...so much so i can't even think of words to express my rage at what is being done to this great nation. Our laws were ment to protect our citizens, and ensure the right to "life, liberty and the persuit of happiness" I feel as if I have none of these lately.
--"The refuses to bend, he refuses to fall, he's always at home with his back to the wall" --Bill Joel- Angry Young Man.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Oh sure, just the sort of thing we'd expect from a stinkin' EMACS USER!
I don't really think he's preaching at all. I don't interpret this as making a point. I interpret it as he really is scared of the U.S and the DMCA and doesn't want to be held accountable in the future for any of his past actions.
--
Garett
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Indeed, the US outlawing something is one thing. That's their business, if it turns out to hurt them too much they can always revert the law. It's a democratic country, isn't it ?
'Fraid not. The U.S is not a democracy. It's a Republic. And it's very rapidly turning into a Corporate Republic.
Voting and all this democracy talk is just masturbation. If people's votes actually mattered then you'd have much higher voter turnouts. If you could actually vote for your party instead of an "electoral college" then maybe you'd be closer to democracy as well.
And the most important distinction between a republic and a democracy is that you can't vote on laws and bills. Only the government can. In a true democracy 51% of the public can piss on the other 49%. But in the U.S the government pisses on everyone.
--
Garett
What was said:
DA: " He released information that broke the DMCA while trying to keep the Linux kernel secure!!!"
defence:" the nature of OSS is to show all changes. the linux kernel does not contain any copyprotected material, however, because of a baddly writen law, making the operating system secure from intruders is now illegal....does that seem right?"
What the jury understands:
DA: This foreign computer programer told other programers how to break into computer systems.
Slashdot Defense: Blah blah non-American blah blah hacker blah blah bad government blah blah fix computer blah blah.
Jury: The defense made no sense. He must be guilty!
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
The SSSCA, which could become DMCA's darker sibling, has even more for Alan Cox to ponder. In fact, I just finished a weekend writing a fairly long letter to my representatives, and sent it only a few moments ago, so that it may get there in time for a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the 25th.
The full letter is at http://www.halley.cc/ed/politics/2001-10-22.conten t.control.html. I welcome comments, and the letter may be reprinted with attribution.
[
sorry to tell you this, the U.S. is a Constitutional Republic
How much of the US constitution needs to have been voided before that bit goes?
As far as I can tell, "Libertarians" seem to be against government interference in any area. Of course, all of these groups tend to favor any government decision that furthers their more immediate goals, or hinders the immediate goals of the other parties. For the Libertarians, this results in an oddly self-referencing approach where one acceptable role of government is to prevent government interference.
I am a minarchist libertarian, and here is my attempt to briefly describe libertarianism.
First of all, the difference between "libertarian" and "Libertarian" is that the second one specifically means a member of the Libertarian Party, while the first one just means anyone who believes in libertarian ideas. Thus Thomas Jefferson could be called a libertarian, but he was not a Libertarian.
The defining principle that all libertarians must believe in (or else they are not really libertarians) is that people own themselves, and the product of their own labor. All else follows from that.
Because people own themselves, it is wrong for government to outlaw behavior that doesn't hurt anyone but the person doing it. Thus it is wrong for government to outlaw smoking, or outlaw eating fatty foods, or outlaw prostitution. (Government may have a legitimate role regulating prostitution, for example to require medical screening of prostitutes for public health reasons, but there is no moral basis for government to outlaw it.)
Because people own themselves, government should not prevent them from freely entering into contracts. Government can legitimately have a role in enforcing contracts. (The major areas where government is useful: national defense, enforcing the laws against violence and theft, and enforcing contracts.) Because of this, if Microsoft wants to require product activation, government shouldn't tell them they can't do that. It's up to people to vote with their dollars. (Note that it was not government that finally dethroned IBM from its monopoly position, it was the free market.)
So, no libertarian can be in favor of a law like the DMCA. The record companies could have annoying license agreements, and libertarians would not be in favor of using government to force the companies to not have them, but the kind of free speech infringement that the DMCA is all about would be right out. And of course no libertarian would be in favor of outlawing encryption.
P.S. In case you are wondering, a "minarchist" libertarian is in favor of a minimal government; an anarchist is in favor of no government. There are many libertarians who believe that we don't need a government at all; the free market can solve all problems. Minarchists like me think we do need a small government to handle things like national defense.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
And the REST of the world must suffer because some american law (which has no jurisdiction OUTSIDE america) exists?
They harrassed an Norwegian, kidnapped a Russian over this law. A good reason for the rest of the world to take notice...
He not only tries to make a point, but he has valid reasons for fearing to be dragged into an US court. Maybe it wouldn't make much sense for the US to sue him, nevertheless he is avoiding to act against the letter of US-law, and that is what is held against you when you end up in court: Neither your intentions, nor the intentions of the law, but the letter of the law.
If any of the patches or future patches even touch the handling of DVD-Players, or future FUCK-ware (Futile Unnecessary Control Keping Hard/Software) he'd better present, what US-lawyers consider a clean west to avoid being dragged through courts until hell freezes over because some corporation is then likely to use the DMCA as a lever and make a public example of him.
Since Skylarov this law has become a very real threat to non-US-citizens.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Security lists should be even more aware of DMCA legislation. When dealing with US-based businesses security experts should demand an outside US contact-address to send the report to, as well as a document stating that the information will not be divulged to US citizens or residents.
Posting the report to a Site accessible from USA gives anyone who wants the means to sue to their liking, and the only reason Microsoft didn't already sue bug-reporters into submissive silence is the cry of outrage to be expected after such a move. But we'll probably soon see that nevertheless with their hacked Mediaformat.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Why not make it a real political party?????
Hm, maybe because after the initial euphoria is over, the party will quickly balkanize. The geezers will vote for the Mainframe party, there will be violent riots between Windows and Linux parties, the Mac party will think different, and run the coolest campaign, but end up with few votes. The republicans will migrate to the Luddite party, and hope to ban all competition by outlawing computers. The democrats will pay lip service to the Linux and Mac parties, but will be bribed by the Windows party.
Eventually we gather a congress, and will use the 3 first terms to pick a format for congress documents. Election procedures will be reengineered, untill they're near perfect. The president invites all geek friends to a LAN pary in the oval room. There is an international incident after the Russian ambassador is caught cheating in doom.
The luddites launches a massive counteroffensive before the next campaign, turning to the 'net(If you can't beat them, join them). Their new streaming multimedia media applications revolutionize everything. 50 years after people have forgotten the old meaning of the word, most people use the word luddite to describe a 'super-geek'
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
The laws associated with copyright and information are so vague and general that it's not surprising that it could be determined that they prevent people from talking about security problems...
Think about it for a minute. Skylerov is in a US jail for a program that his employer sold -- this despite the fact that he put in safeguards to prevent his program's rampant misuse.
If current 'anti-terrorism' laws get passed, things are simply going to get worse... The government is going to be able to spy on us on spec, and arrest us because they 'suspect that he may do something nasty' -- like (in some cases) simply go on strike.
If our course doesn't change radically and quickly, I think that we are in for an information-age Mcarthy era. Cox was made aware of this specific writing on the wall, and he decided to take it seriously. He is, in his own way, inviting us to do the same.
There are times when it is appropriate to willfully break the law, but it should be done carefully and sparingly. Breaking the law just because it is 'inconvenient' is a bad idea. It opens you up to getting your ass really nailed to the wall later on when you do something to get people pissed off.
Cox is a high-profile person. The fact that he doesn't want to risk going to jail for a Skylerov style test case is not something that we should be denouncing him for -- we should be denouncing a law that is so broad that he has to reasonably worry about making security information available to people who have a reasonable need to know.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.