Sorry to intrude, but it is based on the reading of the law and at least according to ars technica's article ( http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/are-you-an-electronic-communication-service-provider.ars) that excludes home routers. That's not to say it couldn't be reinterpreted in the future. Also worth noting is that this is a Republican proposition and both sides still seem a bit bitter about the stimulus.
~Sean On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Fred Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > If it's at all like the EU Date Retention provisions, it would be in the > ISP, not the home router. The Danish want the moral equivalent of a netflow > trace for each user (log of the kind of information netflow records for a > session for each TCP/UDP/SCTP session the user initiates or terminates, > produced on presentation of a warrant or subpoena), but the EU provisions > are more application layer - when did the user "sign on" to the wireless > network, and when did "s/he sign off", to whom did they send emails via the > ISP's servers, and so on? > > Without commenting on police states and such, instantiating legislation is > required in each country signatory to the Cybercrime Treaty. Both major > parties have been on deck during that discussion... > > > On Feb 25, 2009, at 7:30 AM, David Stearns wrote: > > Hi Jim, >> Avoiding the politics of this issue, I suspect that many more home users >> will be affected than corporate or backbone admins. I already log all >> access to my wireless, though currently I don't keep outgoing access logs >> for that long. I suspect that if this were to become law, the logging >> mechanisms in the provided home wireless routers would need a revamp. Or >> at >> least their storage method would. >> -DS >> >> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Jim Willis <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> After having a brief conversation with a friend of mine over the weekend >>> about this new proposed legislation I was horrified to find that I could >>> not >>> dig anything up on it in NANOG. Surely this sort of short minded >>> legislation >>> should have been a bit more thought through in its effects on those that >>> would have to implement these changes. My major concern is not just for >>> myself but for a much broader picture. >>> >>> "Republican politicians on Thursday called for a sweeping new federal law >>> that would require all Internet providers and operators of millions of >>> Wi-Fi >>> access points, even hotels, local coffee shops, and home users, to keep >>> records about users for two years to aid police investigations." >>> >>> http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/02/20/internet.records.bill/index.html >>> >>> >>> I understand and agree that minors should be protected and I think child >>> pornography is awful, however I think how the government is going about >>> catching these criminals with this new legislation will not really be any >>> more efficient than there current methods. Having a log of all IP's that >>> come across my or anyone in America's "home" Wi-Fi for two years is not >>> going to help "police investigations" but will cause me to have to go buy >>> a >>> more expensive router. >>> >>> So I'm just wondering, how would this legislation effect some of you on >>> the >>> NANOG list? >>> >>> -Jim >>> >>> > >
