Slashdot Mirror
White House To Drop Details of Cyber ID On Tax Day
BeatTheChip writes "Dept. of Commerce Scry. Gary Locke plans to release solidified details of the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace [NSTIC] program starting 11 AM on Tax Day. Technologies and new policies will be demonstrated and discussed to attending press. NSTIC, a federal cyber identity program, drew criticisms earlier this year on initial announcement for similarities to a national identity program. It was deemed 'Real ID for the Internet' by some privacy and civil liberty organizations. NSTIC is a national online authentication program for public use under the oversight of the Dept. of Homeland Security."
Sorry citizen, in compliance with U.S. law, Comcast Cable Broadband now requires that all subscribers identify themselves by their U.S. Internet Identification Number before accessing internet content. Please contact your local office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for more information on how to obtain your U.S. Internet Identification Number. And thank you for choosing Comcast as your broadband provider!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
well, fuck.
Thank you for complying, citizen.
Remember, we all love the Computer and those who do not will be removed to a secure detention facility for their safety.
Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Without TPM this idea is a joke. I think you can see where this is going.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Federal Tax filing date is April 18th this year, not the 15th.
that is absolutely terrifying. why aren't citizens revolting over this? i'm canadian and with the prospects of another conservative government looming (god forbid) our douchebag of a prime minister steven harper would most likely adopt a similar program here, as he loves to lick the balls of the US at any opporunity. so please, strong citizens of the Unites States - STOP THIS.
Nobody asked for, or needs this expect maybe the government wanting track citizens and content companies wanting to track "pirates."
I'm not from the US so I gotta ask, why are they wasting money on crap like this?
Seriously?? What is the point?
I guess you can fund any shitty project with taxpayer money, let it go too far and then not give a crap if it works or not.
It'll be For The Children. Or to help Thwart Terrorism. But really, it's just to help pay off the MPAA & RIAA, and make the jobs of the vast legions of winged lawyers that much easier.
I am honestly afraid that this is basically going to turn into an internet driver's license. Imagine if you were required to get government approval in order to read a book? This violates all kinds of freedom of speech provisions. I'll wait to see the details before I make a final judgement, but I much prefer being able to remain effectively anonymous online.
Welcome to City 17. You have chosen or been chosen to relocate to one of our finest remaining urban centres...
A few hours ago we got news about Safari implementing the Do Not Track option, and now we get a this, enforcing tracking for all US citizens.
Drop? As in get rid of, lose, no longer keep?
Is this another US/Everyone else language fail, like "Let's table this idea"?
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
With this system in place, they will know the identity of everyone who posts online, except of course those who have hacked the system so as to appear as someone else. Once this system is in place it will be much easier for the government to gain convictions when crimes are commited. Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I for one welcome our new, positively identified overlords.
The government wishes to enhance consumers' privacy by attaching a unique identifier to each and every online transaction? What an excellent example of doublespeak.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
If it's possible to hack an identity, and it's possible to show that it's possible to hack an identity, then the system is mooted and the conviction based on the system is invalid.
You are about to be tagged and taxed. America owns you.
I don't mind the whole "OMG they know who I am!!!" part, I mind the fact that they are going to waste millions of dollars implementing something that won't work.
They can already figure out who is posting what. The Gov't already has easy access to my IP address along with my CC. They already siphon off everything that goes through the internet, anonymity is no longer exists. You must not assume that anything you say on the internet is "anonymous". Patriot act made sure of that.
So, with that being said, can this be used for good? Is there any redeeming factor here? I can't see how this is more useful than my social security number. Some company will ask for my ID, I give it to them, and then some hacker steals it. All the sudden, it is just as useless as my SSN
Is there any way this can actually be used for good?
(posted as AC because I'm too lazy to log in)
From the NIST NSTIC link in TFA:
# Private: This new "identity ecosystem" protects your privacy. Credentials share only the amount of personal information necessary for the transaction. You control what personal information is released, and can ensure that your data is not centralized among service providers.
# Voluntary: The identity ecosystem is voluntary. You will still be able to surf the Web, write a blog, participate in an online discussion, and post comments to a wiki anonymously or using a pseudonym. You would choose when to use your trusted ID. When you want stronger identity protection, you use your credential, enabling higher levels of trust and security.
it helps if you can track the users.
"Just in time for tax day, Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Mike Enzi (R-WY) are expected to unveil a bill shortly that would permit - for the first time - states to collect taxes on Internet, catalog, and other sales when the seller is not based in the state. All told, the estimated $23 billion Internet tax hike would permit a small cartel of states to reach outside of their borders to force individuals and businesses who aren't even residents to collect taxes."
Read more: http://www.atr.org/senators-unveil-massive-internet-tax-a6053#ixzz1JWvpRZEO
So the idea is that this cyber ID can be used to positively identify you, to reduce fraud, right? So what happens when someone gets your cyber ID anyway and goes around impersonating you? Well, now there is extremely convincing evidence that it was you and not the fraudster. Nobody is going to believe someone else got your cyber ID. This is going to make it a lot harder for victims of fraud to get their name cleared.
I had heard the same thing has happened to people who use those credit cards with the embedded RFID chip (or whatever tech they use). Everyone knows how easy it is to clone the magnetic strip, so those are considered vulnerable and if you dispute a transaction that was done that way, the bank will believe you. However, the chip is considered absolutely secure, so if someone made a transaction that appeared to come from the chip assigned to your card, there was no way to dispute it because there is "irrefutable" evidence that you made the transaction.
Just get a cheap VPS in another country and route everything through that.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
It will be possible to hack an identity. Whether it will be possible to convince a jury that your identity was hacked is another matter altogether.
There are other problems with this system as well. What happens when the system says that you are not you? Not that someone else is you, just that you are not you?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
and remove my PCs from internet connectivity before i subject myself to such a heavy handed draconian measure.
goodbye internet, it was fun while it lasted, but the government is here to help which always takes the fun out of things.
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
So let's all stop pretending this is a democracy, OK?
Let's stop using that word altogether. No democratic republic, no representative democracy.
Let's call it what it is: plutocracy with a nice sprinkle of totalitarianism.
who requested this?
who will pay for it?
who will manage it? (or is homeland security just looking for job security?)
why is this being proposed by commerce?
~Everyone is ~Potentially a ~Criminal..
Online participatory government, which includes online voting, is a necessary next step to increase the involvement of citizens in their governance. But two basic challenges are introduced with online interaction, which are not managed well with our current Internet: Verification and Anonymity. These problems must be solved with an equal concern for both the government's need for verification and a citizen's right to anonymity. Federated identity solutions meet the government's need, but at the expense of the citizen’s.
1. The greatest threat to federated solutions is subversion by authority. In-person voting is highly distributed and each step of the process is very visible. Even in countries where totalitarian governments are in control, it is very difficult to hide intervention. It would be too easy for a government to invisibly alter results in a federated solution because of its centralized nature. Evgeny Morozov recently argued in "The Net Delusion" that the centralized (read: federated) nature of the current Internet makes it vulnerable to centralized control. As current events show, many governments are just waking up to this fact, while China is already making a science of it.
2. Federated solutions require that the citizen register with a third party, chosen by the government, to manage the citizen's online identity. If the citizen has different criteria for trust than the government, then the citizen cannot avail themselves of services requiring an online identity.
3. Even if there was a choice of identity managers, there is no evidence to suggest that security can be guaranteed by the federated solution provider. There are too many examples of governments, businesses, and even security firms being hacked or inadvertently disclosing sensitive user information.
4. Electronic Voting is only one aspect of participative government: polls, comments, data access, and more innovative uses of online collaboration could all be facilitated with a verifiable anonymous identity. But federated identity solutions tend to not be very extensible. Federated identity solutions typically require adding orders of magnitudes of complexity and risk to use the solution in multiple contexts. For example, using a single identifier over multiple sites will increase the risk of re-identification.
5. Anonymization of votes by federated solutions, gains much of its security by introducing additional complexity. Complexity, in turn, introduces new and unknown vulnerabilities, increases the burden of auditing and oversight, and makes subversion by authority easier to hide.
6. One of the weakest security links in most, if not all federated solutions is Public Key Infrastructure. Not only is PKI susceptible to brute-force decryption (the cost of which is dropping every day), but the biggest vulnerability to PKI is when certificates are used. A certificate issuer, such as the government of China, has a built in backdoor to communications dependent upon that certificate. One of the founders of the Internet, Van Jacobson, calls certificates a disaster. This is a clear example that the interests of the citizen are not a priority. Ignoring certificate warnings or other certificate subversions would allow a third party to pretend to be the site that creates the citizen’s online identity and the citizen would be fooled into providing essential identity information to an un-trusted party.
7. There is a long-term risk that the federated identity be used for more and more purposes than it was intended and becomes necessary to function in society, as social security numbers have. Just as social security numbers have exceeded their use as a worker identifier, a federated online voting identity will be used for far more than government interaction and form a huge dependency on the identity provider.
Granted, federated ide
... I am not required to carry identification in public. This is a constitutional right in the US. ... I can hardly understand why my presence in virtual public is any different.
Also, when, exactly, do our political bodies intend to AMEND the constitution to further clarify the important distinctions we need, as citizens in 2011, that relate our constitution from the 1700s to present time? A lot has changed, and while the constitution hasn't changed much, it is getting harder and harder to find 'interpretations' we are largely happy with.
Sorry, but tax day this year is April 18th.
It would seem like an absolute blessing for one with questionable morals to be able to steal identities, obtaining records for advert purposes, etc
You mean like they do already?
The current system is not better, if anything, it's worse because while I believe I have the right and the duty to hold the public sector absolutely accountable to me, doing so in the private sector is rather more difficult.
I retain the right to use violence against the government, it's in my state's constitution, but less so against the private.
Am I the only one here flashing back to "True Names"?
My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
We're talking about just another computer system here. It can and will be hacked.
Isn't it hilarious the USA makes fun of China for how they handle the Internet while slowly trying to copy them...
Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
If it's possible to hack an identity, and it's possible to show that it's possible to hack an identity, then the system is mooted and the conviction based on the system is invalid.
Possibly. Of course, if you take the situation with regards to DUIs, it's illegal in some states (California, I believe) for a defense attorney to even bring up the subject that a breathalyzer is anything but one hundred percent accurate. Said attorney can be up on contempt of court charges if he does. So yeah, it's pretty easy to imagine that the government will prevent any demonstration in court of the fallibility of their system.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Someone needs to take a hearty diarrhea in the federal government's mouth. Fuck the federal government, power to the states.
Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
The real danger is that this is just another form of automated justice. If a log generated by a server somewhere in somebody's cloud says your guilty ... then you're guilty. Period. End of statement. Face it, courts only rarely disregard computer-generated "evidence", although that's likely only because they don't have the mental tools to make a judgement as to the probability of a computer error, so they simply ignore the possibility. I suspect that most people here on Slashdot are like me, in that they certainly would not want their future, their livelihood or their freedom beholden to the reliability and accuracy of somebody's little black box.
What we have here is Man fading in the shadow of the machine. And I don't like it.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
correction: NOT in the best interests of democracy
That IIN has already been registered. You do not exist, access denied.
Add a k so it is NSTICK. A barely noticeable nasty little bloodsucker burried into your skin. teehee
Well, it's not really that hard. All login systems will come equipped with a 'Hack' button in the upper right corner of the display.
Of course, it will only appear to those with sufficient expertise in Computers.
What is ironic is that properly implemented, this system can assure a truly kick-ass privacy ecosystem.
One could base it around a smart card. The private key is stored, and a certificate from a trusted CA (county courthouse) states that this key belongs to this individual.
Then start sticking certificates on the key. The user can determine who gets to see the certificates, and who doesn't.
Carded at the bar? The bar doesn't need to know the DOB. The bar finds a certificate stating that this person is over 21 years of age, signed by the state. That is good enough evidence for legal purposes to start slinging the drinks. The bar is legally covered, and the patron does not have to show when they were born.
Criminal record? The potential employer sees a certificate from NCIC stating the bearer has zero crimes on his/her rap sheet. The employer checks to see if this cert was revoked, and it hasn't been. So, even without looking up the user in a database, there is legal proof of no felonies present.
Degree from accredited institution? The employer finds a cert from Miskatonic University stating the person has graduated and has a B. S. Going up the cert chain, the university has a certificate from an accreditor stating that they are in good standing.
Credit report? Vinny's Used Cars gets a certificate from Experion that the person is in the top tier of credit, and no other details are handed out.
Of course, with keys and an active CRL mechanism, if someone was convicted, the criminal record cert stating there is no record would be revoked, or it can be a SLC that is pulled from a certificate server, with an expiration duration of minutes to hours.
I have hopes... if done right, a good smart card would help privacy and security. However, if done wrong, it would rain down hell on anyone in the US.
That is exactly the point I was trying to make. I knew when I finished the post that I had failed to say it as clearly as I would have liked (but I didn't feel like taking the time to fix it).
Actually, a bigger problem with this sort of government centralized identity database is when the data about who you are becomes corrupted. When one database becomes the central arbiter of who you are, how do you get it corrected when it is wrong?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
What we don't need is a centralized ID system - that's a recipe for all kinds of fraud of other sorts of abuse (like the recent story about how DVR commercial viewing records are correlated with grocery purchases in order to better target you for advertising).
If the government insists on getting involved in ID infrastructure, then they ought to be providing a means for distributed identification. Define a standardized system that promotes multiple, independent IDs that are domain specific. For example, one ID for facebook, another ID for your bank, another ID for your car registration, a different ID for the tax records on property like your house.
Go ahead and define a protocol for handling the identification and authentication transactions, but require taht each party (both users and service providers) keep the database of IDs on their own systems - not off in some massive cross-referenced database, federal or otherwise.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
You mean like the No Fly List?
I still can't got over the way that name brings back echos of the Nazi term for Germany: "Home Land"
Bring on the revolution!!!!
And what if you dont have a smart card?
You have no right to live?
One of the things that is amusing to me is the complete lack of OUTRAGE by the left on this. Had this be GWB, the left would have been screaming mad, and rightfully so. However, since this is Obama, he seemingly is getting a collective "meh, what do you expect".
This just whole idea pisses me off to no end and why I hate fake liberals who give passes to people on shit like this because, well, who knows the reason why. This shit, (R) or (D) is wrong. And these people are still whining about GWB. Gahhhh it is enough to make want to hole up in a gated compound.
Obama, and the rest of you tards in DC, Hear me clearly F. U.!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I prefer to be AC
Come on now high hopes? I think you're being a bit unrealistic here. Reading the other posts I reiterate one word Hack. Also the US Govt fucks everything up! Nuff Said.
Or that you are not anyone.
see: keyloggers
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Try again, guys. Hey, government! You guys can't even protect YOURSELVES from hackers!
So far no one is really safe on the internet. Huge corporations can't even protect their email! What makes you think people will trust their life to a flawed system? We already have so much information in the cloud as it is.
Until my personal info can be absolutely secure, I say no to centralized ID system. (Yeah, like that's going to happen).
Hence the "IdentaEase", this encoded every bit of information about you, your body and your life into one machine readable card that could then be carried around in your wallet. And there fore represented technologies greatest triumph to date over both itself as well as plain common sense.
This said it was to be unveiled on April 15th -- which this year is *not* tax day.
Due April 16th being a Saturday, Washington DC is celebrating Emancipation Day on April 15th ... making it a holiday ... so tax day got moved. With the 16th and 17th being a weekend, you have an extra 3 days this year to do your taxes, as they're not due 'til the 18th.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
And the malware that "bad guy" has on your computer could *never* do something maliciously and permanently corrupting your "profile" ... not to mention the government would *never* violate your civil liberties or impersonate your identity with this system.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
The more you tighten your grip Tarken, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
My 90 year old grandparents that don't even own a computer are going to have very active cyberId's if this passes...
I mean, let's get real here. Department of Homeland Securitytheater? 13 year old script kiddies will eat their lunch.
There will be internet sites all over the place where peoples online credentials will be posted and even little areas where you can add more just to screw with their systems.
Remember the old Credit Card channels they had on IRC back in the day? They won't be able to hold a candle to what we will see with this and unlike the CC channels, many of these will be posted by their actual users just to screw up the system and add "reasonable doubt" to any action their account is tied to online as to who done it.
Wrong - since this is voluntary, they only know anyone that logs in with their identity, which would be moronic for anyone hacking - good hackers always hide behind NAT and preferably also anonymous open proxy servers. Incidentally, IPv6 has the same dream in the name of "security" - assign each person a unique IP based on their computer, disallow NAT, and you can trace every IP back to the source. It is the FBI's dream... except that IPv6 IPs are generated using the MAC address on the router, which can be spoofed... DOH!
Have you ever worked in the Smart Card or Cert industries? This has never been done right, and never will be, due to a reliance on people.
You have to trust that everyone has the certs they're supposed to have, and that no errors in cert deployment happened (wrong cert revoked, inappropriate cert given out, etc). Then there's theft of smart cards, cracking of cards for the private key, control over the card readers (how does the user determine who sees what certs when the person can't even read the data on their card without a reaader -- and not all readers are created equal).
Think of the recent news items where a CA was issuing certificates to an untrusted party, and where MOST CAs were issuing certs for inappropriate zones.
Personally, having dealt with this technology in-depth for over 10 years, I'd rather trust a web of trust (real people) than a CA chain. The CA chain can augment, but it should NEVER replace.
How long do you think this will remain voluntary?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
That is exactly the point I was trying to make. I knew when I finished the post that I had failed to say it as clearly as I would have liked (but I didn't feel like taking the time to fix it). Actually, a bigger problem with this sort of government centralized identity database is when the data about who you are becomes corrupted. When one database becomes the central arbiter of who you are, how do you get it corrected when it is wrong?
Yes. That sounds an awful lot like what is happening with the TSA's "no fly" list, actually.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
> It would seem like an absolute blessing for one with questionable morals to be able to steal identities, obtaining records for advert purposes, etc
This reminds me of how the government has a system in place to warn them when officials are misusing their passport record access to access information about important people--e.g. presidential candidates. Nice of them to design access restriction that only cares when the information about *important* people is accessed without reason.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
FYI, In Australia Telstra 'asks' for your licence to connect your home phone. They make it sound like giving your licence is absolutely required.
Last time this occurred for me, the conversation started to wear a little on the operator -
"What is your licence number?" ... and no issues. No licence required to register a home phone.
"What licence?"
"Car licence"
"Why would I have a car licence?"
"Err. Oh."
"I am requesting for a home phone connection, not registering a car"
"Okay then"
I called back later to ask why they needed a *licence* number for a home phone connection, but no one could actually say.
Although, the government made the law so that you need to identify yourself to register a mobile phone. I do wonder how people who have a licence (don't drink, don't drive, etc) obtain a mobile connection.
Interestingly, with the recent attempt by google - where they demand a phone number to verify you - is completely thwartable. You can buy sim cards for $2 each - as many as you like.
Knowing someone's phone number (ala scraping it via Android / iphone) can be very useful for identifying individuals.. but phone numbers can be changed easily. It's just a pain to do.
I'm surprised that they haven't suggested using phone numbers to identify people.
You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
Darknets already exist, and they're pretty much unstoppable.
Like freedom? Don't like being under Big Brother's thumb? Dump the Internet, and catch a ride on the Internet's competition, the *Internot!!
(*Yeah, stupid name...but Alternet and Outernet are taken.)
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
This is a horrible idea let issue everyone smarts cards or a login system for the US internet lets see the problems
1. Someone steal your password or smartcard and now your accountable for hacking something good luck getting out of that. Ask people about how hard it is to prove credit thief how hard that shit is is to remove
2. IF smart cards are issue who buying me a smartcard reader I'm not
3. IF a smartcard or login system is used and ran by the government I betting money the login server is going to go down weekly and no one getting internet that day think about it your going to need a LOGIN System for the whole USA
4. How will it handle mult device logins and will there be a limit to how many device you can login to at one time I got a smartphone, PC, servers
5. CA have to expire so does that mean I have to go to the government office and wait in a long ass line to get a new CA on my card
6. You damage your card or it get stolen on Saturday wait it the government you gotta wait till Monday to get a new one
7.How secure is a Smart card or password for a big system like that I give it a week till 1 yr till someone find a way to clone the card or change keys on it or make good counterfits
8. Maybe it will have RFID like the new passports and let anyone steal my info
9. Who going to show grandma how to use it or explain to her she has to go to the government office to get a card ( good example would be the Digital TV move most older people didn't know they could get the boxes at a discount despite being ADs on tv everyday for it)
10. Who going to pay for it I thought the government was going to shut down to money problems think how much it going to cost to make a database with every US person and check for errors and enter there info into that system and then you need a data center to hold it plus the connection to the data center and redundant center needed for fail over and workers for the datacenter.
Given a benevolent government and benevolent holders of economic power, there would be some sense in a way of identifying real people for real purposes, like making online tax returns or opening bank accounts. In the real world such a mechanism would be massively abused. The government would demand that all online expression be tied to such an identifier, and those with economic power would demand that it be used for all financial transactions, either because it suits their convenience (like with driving licences) or because they support the government's authoritarian agenda. And because capitalism is a 'pay up or piss off' system there would be no other way to access goods and services.
Yes, but for how long can you run away? If you just keep escaping, inevitably this thing is going to take over because no one opposed.
As the subject states, this is the initial roll-out of "Trusted Computing".
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
It's simply had the political name-change game played with it. If at first it doesn't fly, rename it and try again. Rinse & repeat until passage/implementation/adoption.
As has been commented elsewhere here, this is something that will be slowly expanded with government and corporate pressure from initially being voluntary to eventually become necessary to connect to your ISP.
This thing is a tyrant's dream. It *must* be prevented from being implemented. There's no way that much power will escape being abused and corrupted.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
In other news, US Government to get overthrown the day after tax day.
The real danger is that this is just another form of automated justice
"Automated Justice" sounds like it could be a Steven Seagal movie.
They stole his ssh keys...
They removed his domain account from the Administrators group...
They disabled AutoPlay on all in the enterprise PCs...
But they forgot to disable his vengence (and his User Account Control).
AUTOMATED JUSTICE - In theaters April 18th
- Donny was a good bowler, and a good man.
Oh, FUCK NO.
Do not want.
FTA: "a White House initiative to improve online security, increase privacy and foster economic growth and innovation online."
More like, "to screw with people's security online, to invade privace, and foster the economic growth and dominance of our largest campaign financers online!"
I will be avoiding this at all costs.
How appropriate: captcha is "victims."
Message to the Federal government: Fuck off. kthxbai
Don't worry, hackers will get people's trusted ID and use that instead. So there will be dead people who are hacking databases and websites around the world. And once a hacker gets ahold of a trusted ID of a congresscritter, the laws will get changed _very_ quickly.
"Those found without credentials are subject to summary destruction." - enforcement officer, Equalibrium
YES!! DO IT!!! Let's see how many of us 'privacy advocates' will tell our ISP's to get stuffed and disconnect from the net. Let's see if this type of fundamental change brings back the concept of local community bbs' and community wifi meshnets. I for one would LOVE to take a step back to 1985 with some of our new modern communications toys! It would be nice to utilize things like WASTE and know that my pron is coming from the neighbor kids 3 blocks away rather than one of Baltic states.
It would be interesting to see how quickly a fully privatized "Outernet" (dibs!) would be built by the same pioneering spirit that the original hackers had. Go for it feds, put this restriction on free speech, the genie is out of the bottle and in any given neighborhood there's at least a half dozen people that know how to configure a cisco router.
*rant off*
. . . . . in cooperation with the department of Homeland Security, Epsilon, the industry's leading marketing services firm, with a broad array of data- driven, multichannel marketing solutions, will be tasked with the implementation and management of the new security features . . . . .