When you look at this from above, it's not about the music, mp3, naptser or whatever. It's about right. I don't think this will stop people from sharing files: fact: Napster might be the one heard about, but it will certainly not be the only. fact: It would be trivial linking smaller networks together (multiple searchers, database sharing, etc). fact: maybe you can garbage Gnutella, but you cannot stop it. The idea behind a decentralized network could pretty easily be enhanced to a near unstopable thing. fact: The music industry have lost a lot of their market (according to my sources at least). fact: they wouldn't sue unless they were scared. Maybe they would sue for getting the temporary ban of the napster server. IMO what we need to do now, is to move the thing to a new network (OpenNap for instance). Just to show RIAA that a single trial won't get them any further. But what about making a hybrid between napster and gnutella: Let there be centralized servers, but let them be spread all over the world, run by different people, so they would have to sue numbers. Let these servers behave like gnutella in between. This would create two things: a) you could call for a "blackout" of a fake server, just like fighting spam on the usenet or blocking an IP class in your mail server b) impossibility to sue a single company for their creation. for this to work, servers need to be static (but most ppl are on static adresses these days, so who counts)...
Well, if FBI wants to sweep through e-mail in order to find a few criminals then fine. The only problem i see, is the point that anyone comitting a crime would be doing almost everything to make it impossible to be eavedropped by "canivore". I still suspect common terrorists will be using their PGP or similiar key encoding system, which will make it a though job for FBI
Secondly i see the problem here. If only a couple of messages are encrypted (like 1%), they will easily be able to find the offending data and try to decrypt it, but if each letter traversing the net were encrypted, it would be a hard task.
encrypted mail is armored against tampering and is almost always compressed in order to lower the number of repeats (which serves as a weakness to cryptographers).
So I personally don't see why they should be sweeping through e-mails on the backbone.
Slashdot Mirror
When you look at this from above, it's not about the music, mp3, naptser or whatever. It's about right. I don't think this will stop people from sharing files: fact: Napster might be the one heard about, but it will certainly not be the only. fact: It would be trivial linking smaller networks together (multiple searchers, database sharing, etc). fact: maybe you can garbage Gnutella, but you cannot stop it. The idea behind a decentralized network could pretty easily be enhanced to a near unstopable thing. fact: The music industry have lost a lot of their market (according to my sources at least). fact: they wouldn't sue unless they were scared. Maybe they would sue for getting the temporary ban of the napster server. IMO what we need to do now, is to move the thing to a new network (OpenNap for instance). Just to show RIAA that a single trial won't get them any further. But what about making a hybrid between napster and gnutella: Let there be centralized servers, but let them be spread all over the world, run by different people, so they would have to sue numbers. Let these servers behave like gnutella in between. This would create two things: a) you could call for a "blackout" of a fake server, just like fighting spam on the usenet or blocking an IP class in your mail server b) impossibility to sue a single company for their creation. for this to work, servers need to be static (but most ppl are on static adresses these days, so who counts)...
Well, if FBI wants to sweep through e-mail in order to find a few criminals then fine. The only problem i see, is the point that anyone comitting a crime would be doing almost everything to make it impossible to be eavedropped by "canivore". I still suspect common terrorists will be using their PGP or similiar key encoding system, which will make it a though job for FBI
Secondly i see the problem here. If only a couple of messages are encrypted (like 1%), they will easily be able to find the offending data and try to decrypt it, but if each letter traversing the net were encrypted, it would be a hard task.
encrypted mail is armored against tampering and is almost always compressed in order to lower the number of repeats (which serves as a weakness to cryptographers).
So I personally don't see why they should be sweeping through e-mails on the backbone.