Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555) wrote to Steven Horn at 13:53 on 17 Dec 2002:

 MvdV> Points is the /do/ monitor e-mail on a routine basis.

So? Policy 4.07 tells Fidonet sysops to examine netmail and echomail for
illegal content.  That requirement led to some Fidonet sysops to push
SecureNet using encrypted mail although that too is a breach ofPolicy 4.07.
 

 MvdV> I suppose they would like to do that, but they can't monitor
 MvdV> netmail without first knowing where to look. If the netmail is
 MvdV> send directly, they would either have to gain physical access to
 MvdV> one of the systems or they would have to tap the telephone line
 MvdV> and decode the modem signals. In order to do that they must
 MvdV> already have gained some information that leads to suspicion by
 MvdV> other means. E-mail on the other hand can be massively monitored
 MvdV> by robots searching for specific keywords or strings to direct
 MvdV> them to areas that warrant further investigation. It is this
 MvdV> first step in the screening that is not possible with netmail.

If the authorities know whose traffic they need to intercept, the rest is
not difficult.

 MvdV> It would be impossible without the first step of pointing out the
 MvdV> parties that need monitoring. One can not monitor ALL data
 MvdV> traffic over telephone lines.

But that first step is not difficult at all.  Informants are surprisingly
easy to find as the Steve Jackson Games, Tony Davis, and Amateur Action
files demonstrate. 

 MvdV> Famous last words....

And you have new first words for us?

 MvdV> That is next to impossible without the owners of those computers
 MvdV> being aware of it.

I don't know what happens in the Netherlands but over here lines are
routinely tapped without the parties knowing.

 MvdV> And shown that you gave misleading information. The "transmitted
 MvdV> over telephone lines" part was irrelevant.

Neither you nor I will know that with any certainty but given the frequency
of telephone taps on this continent I am not prepared to say that
interceptions are irrelevant.
 
 MvdV> Neither do I. It is InterMail that does the "piddling" for me in
 MvdV> the small hours when I am asleep.

I'm a light sleeper and the sound of a modem "handshaking" is
enough to wake me. 

 MvdV> Of course they do not cost nothing. TANSTAAFL. You just pay for
 MvdV> them in another way.

But I pay less them for that way.  If I used my modem, for $88 euros a
month I would get my telephone, my Internet access to my ISP, the ability
to move my Fidonet mail and a lot of time to surf or download files,
listservs and what not.  And since we don't use Euros, my cost would be
$CAN55.35 which I could readily afford.  Now I use ADSL which is more but
it allows me to eliminate my second telephone line and its cost of
$59.95CAN per month includes ISP access.  

 MvdV> Technically yes, practically no.

Have you not been following the threads in FTSC-PUBLIC?

 MvdV> It will do everything it did 30 years ago. That is why we call it
 MvdV> DOWNward compatible.

But it will do more and your 30 year-old equipment will not.

Take care,

Steven Horn (steven_a_horn{at}yahoo.ca)
Moderator, ALASKA_CHAT 
--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+