This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to discuss@1net.org. Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit 1net.org.

[I-coordination] A Framework for Recent Internet Governance Discussions – From Montevideo Statement to 1net

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Wed Dec 4 06:37:19 CET 2013


On Dec 4, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 04/12/2013 14:45, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> ...
>> ... What is mistakenly called Internet crime
>> is actually just crime that happens to involve the Internet in some
>> fashion. 
> 
> I think this is a fundamental fact that needs to be written on a very
> large banner placed in every room where people purport to discuss
> "Internet governance". You don't regulate bank robbery by regulating
> the highways used by bank robbers.
> 
> Sigh. I remember in 1995, when only a handful of people in the UN
> organisations could even spell 'Internet', being asked (at the 'Geneva
> Internet Day' organised by Guy Girardet for the benefit of all the UN
> organisations) about the need for Internet laws. I replied more or less
> in the same words as Phill's quoted above. I think I also said something
> like 'if it's illegal on the street, it's illegal on the Internet'. Here
> we are 18 years later and people still don't get it.
> 
> Mutatis mutandis, the same applies to privacy protection and legal
> intercept. The Internet really isn't different in some magical way from
> older media.

Brian - 
 
  I'm generally in agreement, but need to note that we (the Internet technical 
  community) have been the ones making the Internet different in some respects...

  If someone were to sneak around your house trying all of the doors and windows 
  (and repeat that every day for every house in the neighborhood), you would not 
  be told to "just ignore it, just get good locks and maybe an nice alarm system" 
  when you reported to to the local law enforcement authorities.
  
  Now try reporting "attack traffic" on your broadband Internet connection to the 
  law enforcement authorities and see what (if any) response you actually get...

  There's some very clear benefits to not tracking traffic at the levels which
  allows recourse for such behavior on the Internet (and we likely are enjoying
  the overall correct posture today given such tradeoffs), but it also has some 
  real world consequences that are less than ideal.  This leads to occasions with
  those in government when I'm asked why the Internet is setup so differently.  
  Our Internet is quite unaccountable under many circumstances, and this leads 
  to escalating technological attacks and defenses which if mapped to the "real 
  world" would be considered daft and definitely not "mutatis mutandis" by any
  measure.

FYI,
/John

Disclaimer: My views alone (or at least we all hope they're my views, since if it
            were someone else impersonating me and forging email in my name, that
            would apparently be entirely my fault for not using the right technology 
            for securing my communications, as opposed to an actual crime that would
            have some perpetrator be held accountable for...)
       







More information about the I-coordination mailing list