1996-04-11 - Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun

Header Data

From: “Christopher J. Shaulis” <cjs@netcom.com>
To: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Message Hash: 617125b50a6a51905ee431700bc1225ba95551810ba460bac089efd512195136
Message ID: <199604110005.UAA00491@localhost.cjs.net>
Reply To: <v02120d2bad91ecd377cc@[]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-11 13:57:10 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:57:10 +0800

Raw message

From: "Christopher J. Shaulis" <cjs@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:57:10 +0800
To: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Subject: Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun
In-Reply-To: <v02120d2bad91ecd377cc@[]>
Message-ID: <199604110005.UAA00491@localhost.cjs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text

> At 9:48 4/10/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:
> [...]
> >We know that governments would like to impose things like the Simple
> >Tax Transfer Protocol on the Net as well as Is A Person (and Is A Minor)
> >Protocols.
> There is one thing about the proposed minor flag addition to IP that I
> don't understand. [No, I am not surprised by this. Mandatory authorization
> to establish a connection and an "Internet Driver License", probably in the
> form or a smart card are coming].
> If my computer creates the IP packet, what is there to prevent me from
> modifying the value of the "Minor/Adult" flag at my leisure?

In the future, you will have to sign all packets (with a key
conveniently available from verisign and noone else).

Just kidding. =)