*BSD News Article 66662


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.hawaii.edu!ames!olivea!xenitec!news.kei.com!uhog.mit.edu!jc
From: jc@eddie.mit.edu (John Chambers)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.osf.misc,comp.unix.sco.misc,comp.security.firewalls,comp.unix.admin,comp.org.usenix,comp.org.uniforum,comp.dcom.net-management,comp.os.ms-w
Subject: Re: Communications Decency Act may corrupt protocols
Date: 23 Apr 1996 15:44:32 GMT
Organization: Has not been determined.
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <4litt0$5n5@MICRO-HEART-OF-GOLD.MIT.EDU>
References: <4l7k5h$if1@alca.Helsinki.FI>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eddie.mit.edu
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.protocols.tcp-ip:43960 comp.unix.bsd.misc:806 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3270 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17902 comp.unix.osf.misc:3038 comp.unix.sco.misc:16608 comp.security.firewalls:2069 comp.unix.admin:40979 comp.org.usenix:5525 comp.org.uniforum:544 comp.dcom.net-management:2444

vhalkka@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
> In article <4l4hcl$n75@hobyah.cc.uq.oz.au>,
> Catherine Allen <cccalle0@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au> wrote:
> >This is a world-wide net and a world-wide problem.
> >Your president and your laws do not have jurisdiction over most of it.
> >A better solution is needed.
> 
> I don't know.. maybe we should just gradually leave the USA out of the 
> current Internet, vital services will surface in some other place.
> 
> There could be a US governement controlled filth gateway between
> 'US-safenet' and the Internet.

Perhaps this is  a  very  practical  idea.   This  is  not  materially
different   from   the   "perimeter  network"  model  that  a  lot  of
organizations are using for security.  The idea is fairly simple,  and
is  described  in a lot of texts on security.  The organization simply
provides two parallel networks, one an "internal" network that is  not
connected  to the outside world, and the other the "perimeter" network
that is connected.   A  small  number  of  gateways  between  the  two
implement the organization's access policies.

We  might start suggesting to the politicians that this be adopted for
the Internet.  All the FQDNs in the ".us" domain  will  be  considered
internal to the USA and subject to its jurisdiction. All other domains
will be declared legally external to the USA.

How might this be used? Well, for one, all those parents worried about
their  childrens'  Internet  access  could  ust  make  sure that their
machines (and those in the schools) are in the .us domain,  where  the
authorities would patrol for indecent material and suppress it. Adults
could apply for  a  domain  outside  .us  and  get  unlimited  access.
Companies  that  want  to  use  secure communications could keep their
domains outside .us; those that want their  communications  to  comply
with   the   US  government's  key-escrow  policies  could  apply  for
subdomains under .us.

This seems like an approach that could satisfy everyone, and it'd only
take a small reorg of the Net to implement.

Hey, do you think we could get the politicians to buy it?

;-)




--
#!/usr/bin/perl -s-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RSA-in-3-lines-PERL
($k,$n)=@ARGV;$m=unpack(H.$w,$m."\0"x$w),$_=`echo "16do$w 2+4Oi0$d*-^1[d2%
Sa2/d0<X+d*La1=z\U$n%0]SX$k"[$m*]\EszlXx++p|dc`,s/^.|\W//g,print pack('H*'
,$_)while read(STDIN,$m,($w=2*$d-1+length($n||die"$0 [-d] k n\n")&~1)/2)