[MLB-WIRELESS] A letter I got....

[Craig Sanders]

On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 10:51:07AM +1100, Fenn Bailey wrote:
> The practicality of applying this legistlation to an ad-hoc wireless
> network sounds very interesting indeed. However, if the network is not
> owned by any entity and is merely an informal agreement to communicate
> in a certain standard, I can't really see how a 'governing body' can
> be expected to be able to intercept/monitor the whole lot.
> 
> If someone is legally savvy, the legistlation should be relatively
> easy to find.

Disclaimer: IANAL.

the closest analogy is that of neighbours sharing a (possibly wireless)
intercom system.  AFAIK, there's no requirement for centralised
monitoring of those.

the only difference is that the intercom system is digital rather than
analog, and scales to more participants.


btw, as others have said, there's not much to worry about.  the internet
industry has operated under similar monitoring provisions for a few
years now, and there's no sign of misuse or abuse.  ISPs have to provide
logs and assist in monitoring when served with the appropriate warrant.
refusal to comply with the warrant is a potentially gaolable offence.
providing access to logs or monitoring *without* the warrant is also a
potentially gaolable offence.

if spooks want to monitor internet traffic, they'll do it at exchanges
and intl gateways, not at some dinky little wireless node in someone's
backyard.  if they want to monitor wireless traffic they'll equip a van
with the best WiFi sniffing gear they can buy or build and drive to
wherever they need to snoop and/or install sniffer nodes in buildings
they can get access to like police stations, electricity substations,
etc.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>

Fabricati Diem, PVNC.
 -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch

To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message