1996-02-13 - Re: Firewall USA to Firewall China

Header Data

From: Peter Monta <pmonta@qualcomm.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1ebc2737e2e2e2e5984a7f8bcf2fd988a61b4c0532a7556c421686a314306412
Message ID: <199602130139.RAA11162@mage.qualcomm.com>
Reply To: <v01530500ad454e6a21aa@[206.86.81.52]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-13 05:43:04 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 13:43:04 +0800

Raw message

From: Peter Monta <pmonta@qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 13:43:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Firewall USA to Firewall China
In-Reply-To: <v01530500ad454e6a21aa@[206.86.81.52]>
Message-ID: <199602130139.RAA11162@mage.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> [ Jim Clark, "Firewall China" ]
>
>   A: A lot of people think that's not possible. It's difficult to enforce,
>   but it's certainly possible. A corporation has a so-called fire wall -- a
>   single point of entry into the corporate net. You can have a country
>   that has a single point of entry into its "country net." It's doable. All
>   you need, though, is one breach of security, and there's a leak.
> 
>   A fire wall is a filter -- it filters and doesn't let certain people come in.
>   You can only come in if you have the right permission. So you could
>   easily set that up so that it would filter out your objectionable
>   material.

He seems to be confusing network security with the propagation of content.
A firewall is going to have a lot more trouble filtering dangerous
thoughts than UDP port 1234, unless there are humans in the loop.

Peter Monta   pmonta@qualcomm.com
Qualcomm, Inc./Globalstar







Thread