Michigan First With A Law That Could Outlaw VPNs 554
zaren writes "Holy frell, Taco, we're gonna be criminals! I was checking out Freedom to Tinker after reading the posting about that multi-state anti-VPN-style legislation, and I saw a new posting that says that Michigan has ALREADY passed such legislation, and it goes into effect on MONDAY, MARCH 31, 2003 . Guess I better tighten down the base station and batten down the hatches..."
Haha, This could be the end of NAT! (Score:5, Informative)
This doesn't only concern end users. This concerns any organisation that obtains an address range for a fee and use NAT to connect their network, including many ISPs.
This might be the end of NAT. Good riddance and welcome IPv6!
Not one but two !!! (Score:5, Informative)
This law has not one but two offensive clauses-
1(b) Conceal the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service.
1 (c) To receive, disrupt, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, acquire, intercept, or facilitate the receipt, disruption, decryption, transmission, retransmission, acquisition, or interception of any telecommunications service without the express authority or actual consent of the telecommunications service provider.
While 1(b) is probably the most obnoxious clause, 1(c) is not far behind... it makes it a "felony" to eg. hook two televisions on single cable connection and even make it a felony offense to put NAT boxen !! At our dorm, for World cup we put a computer with TV tuner card connected to cable connection and then used it to stream the transmission for people to watch in their rooms... HELL now we'll be criminals (and that too 'felony'!!) for that...
Fuck.
Who said "America- land of free" must now be turning in graves.
Re:Not concealing anything. (Score:5, Informative)
What else do they need to know?
Sec. 540c.
(1) A person shall not assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise an unlawful telecommunications access device or assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise a telecommunications device intending to use those devices or to allow the devices to be used to do any of the following or knowing or having reason to know that the devices are intended to be used to do any of the following:
(a) Obtain or attempt to obtain a telecommunications service with the intent to avoid or aid or abet or cause another person to avoid any lawful charge for the telecommunications service in violation of section 219a.
(b) Conceal the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service.
(c) To receive, disrupt, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, acquire, intercept, or facilitate the receipt, disruption, decryption, transmission, retransmission, acquisition, or interception of any telecommunications service without the express authority or actual consent of the telecommunications service provider.
The rest of the bill appears to provide support and procedural infrastructure for the section above.
Sorry.
Re:Also with effect 31 March... (Score:1, Informative)
"Any man or woman, not being married to each other, who lewdly and lasciviously associates and cohabits together". I think that means living with your girlfriend & fucking her in private.
MA public hearing on this (Score:1, Informative)
There's a public hearing on this on Wednesday at 10am for the Massachusetts law. If you're a Massachusetts resident, come down and tell lawmakers what you think. Please remember that lawmakers are impressed by articulate, original, direct arguments, so come prepared. Shrillness, repetitiveness, and rudeness will only hurt us. Also, dress like a conformist if at all possible, because old people are impressed by suits and dresses, and unmipressed by anything less fancy.
Add to that DSL and Firewalls (Score:5, Informative)
Here is an interesting article in The Register [theregister.co.uk] which describes pending legislation in both Massachusetts and Texas are that would extend the DCMA to make devices such as DLS routers and firewalls illegal.
VPN against my ntl: T&Cs already (Score:5, Informative)
18. Use of Virtual Private Network (VPN)
As stated above, the ntl Internet and/or Interactive Services are for residential use only and we do not support the use of VPN. If we find you are using VPN via the ntl IP network we may instruct you to stop using it and you must comply with this request. This is in order to prevent problems to ntl (eg network performance) and other Internet u FO.
Re:Could someone explain (Score:4, Informative)
Say, you had a family. Wife, four kids, and a couple of mutts.. etc. You have a computer you do a lot of serious work on, a computer you tinker around with, your kids each have one. There may be another in the den you use to play games on and maybe use in conjunction with the TV and stereo.
But you have one internet connection.
By use of Network Address Translation (NAT), you can set your system up so that all the computers can access the internet through a router/switch. You can dedicate a clunker machine for this, or just use a router/switch designed for this.
The ISP gives you so much bandwidth for so much money. If only one machine is using the connection, it gets all the bandwidth. If more machines start using it, the switch shares the available bandwidth amongst the machines requesting it.
Using NAT, your machines can be configured so they can talk to each other privately without involving the internet - even though they are communicating through the network card - because the switch can be configured to keep local chatter off the net. Certain IP numbers do not route, such as the 10.xxx.xxx.xxx subnet. So you have an entire class A subnet to play around with for your home or business. Everybody has it. All yours. It won't route. But if you want the internet, the switch will recognize a routable number and gate you onto your internet connection, and provide the necessary address translation so the connection is routed between the appropriate machines.
Personally, I can not determine any difference between whether or not multiple *machines* are using the bandwidth, or multiple instances of browser windows on one machine is using it, as far a paying for bandwidth delivered goes. What puzzles me is how anyone could consider a NAT box illegal, as every packet going through still has completely valid source and destination fields - it won't route through your ISP without them. At the ISP level, its completely traceable as to who's getting what.
So I am puzzled.. I am completely failing to see the logic of this legislation. It makes just about as much sense to me as some sort of legislation mandating each child gets his own mailbox in front of the house.
Free State Project (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not concealing anything. (Score:4, Informative)
Well, since VPN'd packets are encrypted before hitting the 'telecommunications service provider' network, decrypting it wouldn't be illegal under this law (as long as it's intended for you that is - the intercept clause would ensure that).
There's nothing here saying that anything has to be transmitted in the clear, and all your service provider is responsible for is shuttling packets - encrypted or no. Don't mess with that process, and you won't be breaking the law.
Re:Haha, This could be the end of NAT! (Score:3, Informative)
Did you miss the part that said WITHOUT CONSENT ??? Sheesh, if your ISP allows you to NAT, then you can NAT. If they say NO NAT'ing, find a new one... This law changes nothing except the penalties for violating your ISPs TOS (now they can sic the cops on you after disco'ing your butt).
IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPEAR AT A FORUM FOR THIS LAW (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Could someone explain (Score:3, Informative)
You seem to be confusing a private network using NAT and a Virtual Private Network.
As the VPN Information on the World Wide Web [shmoo.com] puts it (bold is my emphasis on certain parts):
Literally, a VPN is two remote networks treating one another like they're one big LAN and routing communications (encrypted) across another network, usually The Internet.
Re:This applies to UNLAWFUL devices (Score:4, Informative)
Except that all a cable operator has to do is declare in their terms and conditions that you may not run NAT and that you may not hook multiple computers up to your network connection without paying a fee for the extra computers. Bada-bing, bada-bam, your NAT hookup is now not just against the T&C's, it's a criminal offense.
In the specific case of NAT, this law has the effect of permitting cable operators to maintain a cable-tv-like fee plan, rather than simply setting reasonable charge schedules for the actual bits transferred. There's no reason why the law should be molded to enable cable companies to avoid rational pricing according to the nature of the technology at hand.
The whole point of this is to prevent cable modem users from sharing their internet access over wi-fi and the like with neighbors. That's a laudable goal from the cable companies' view, but it ignores the fact that what really costs the cable company is the number of bits transferred. If I am NAT'ing to a neighbor and my neighbor uses 1% of the Internet bandwidth that is going over my cable modem, the incremental cost of that is 1%. The cost to the cable companies profit, though, is 50% across our two domiciles.
That's what this law is for, and it's not legitimate.
Reading the bill? (Score:2, Informative)
Paraphrasing, it says:
It is illegal to manufacture or posses an unlawful telecommunications device that can be used to steal service, intercept messages and hide where it is being used.
An unlawful telephone device (from the ammended article):
includes but is not limited to a clone telephone, clone microchip, tumbler telephone, tumbler microchip, or wireless scanning device capable of acquiring, intercepting, receiving, or otherwise facilitating the use of a telecommunications service without immediate detection.
Later in the article it exempts amateur radio equipment.
Now, since when is a router or firewall an unlawful telecommunications device???
All this does is make owning or selling phone freaking equipment illegal. It ha nothing to do with George Bush being the second coming of Hitler or any such thing.
Appropriate Ayn Rand quote (Score:4, Informative)
Thus, making everyone subject to blackmail by the state--"obey our every command, or we'll find something bad you've done and punish you. Bow before Zod!"
Uhh... YOU need to read the Bill... (Score:4, Informative)
Note the following line in the ammendment.
(b) "Telecommunications access device" shall have the same meaning as in section 219a.
Here's the URL for Section 219a.
Section 219a [michiganlegislature.org]
(b) "Telecommunications access device" means any of the following:
(i) Any instrument, device, card, plate, code, telephone number, account number, personal identification number, electronic serial number, mobile identification number, counterfeit number, or financial transaction device as defined in section 157m that alone or with another device can acquire, transmit, intercept, provide, receive, use, or otherwise facilitate the use, acquisition, interception, provision, reception, and transmission of any telecommunications service.
(ii) Any type of instrument, device, machine, equipment, technology, or software that facilitates telecommunications or which is capable of transmitting, acquiring, intercepting, decrypting, or receiving any telephonic, electronic, data, internet access, audio, video, microwave, or radio transmissions, signals, telecommunications, or services, including the receipt, acquisition, interception, transmission, retransmission, or decryption of all telecommunications, transmissions, signals, or services provided by or through any cable television, fiber optic, telephone, satellite, microwave, data transmission, radio, internet based or wireless distribution network, system, or facility, or any part, accessory, or component, including any computer circuit, security module, smart card, software, computer chip, pager, cellular telephone, personal communications device, transponder, receiver, modem, electronic mechanism or other component, accessory, or part of any other device that is capable of facilitating the interception, transmission, retransmission, decryption, acquisition, or reception of any telecommunications, transmissions, signals, or services.
Note that telephone numbers, PINs, and account numbers are considered telecommunication access devices.
What color is the sky in your world?
BTW, This has nothing to do with being anti-George Bush, anti-corporation, anti-war, or anti-republican. This is about EVERYDAY corruption that's been happening in this and EVERY OTHER country since the dawn of civilization that infects EVERY political party.
Grow up and stop being naive.
Re:What were they thinking??? (Score:3, Informative)
No. Because the server now lives in CA :P.
Also, it's doubtful that would be considered illegal anyway because you aren't preventing the server from determining where you're posting from, just people reading your post. I want you to tell me where I'm posting this message from, including IP. Unless you have access to the server logs, you can't - because that info isn't in the post information displayed. I'm making no effort to mask my identity to the Slashdot servers.
However, my understanding was that this only applied to my ISP. I'm also making no effort to hide the origin from my ISP. So I'm in the clear based on that law. (Although IANAL, and even if I were, I'm not in Michigan, so I still wouldn't be able to give good legal advice :)) Once it gets to the Slashdot servers, telling them to withhold user information in the post should be considered OK. After all, my reading your post, even if anonymous, does not involve you concealing your point of origin. It just means I don't know who posted the given post.
(Another reading might make Slashdot allowing anonymous posting illegal, but people who post anonymously would still be in the clear. Maybe.)
I don't know. Just stay away from Michigan for a while :).
Re:make the dog vomit up its tail (Score:3, Informative)
A Canadian citizen of Iranian birth was living in New York. It wasn't widely publicized (enough, apparantly), but all foreign nationals born in Muslim countries were required to register themselves at the police station for fingerprinting, etc, but wasn't sure that he had to, being Canadian, so he stopped in to ask them. Turns out he was two days past the deadline.
So they put him in shackles, threw him in lockup in San Diego, and treated him about as badly as they could get away with.
The one thing I've learned from stories lately is 'Don't trust American authorities [www.cbc.ca]'. After all, you too could be a terrorist without even knowing it.
--Dan
Re:What a strange world (Score:5, Informative)
I'll bite. I presume you're making a reference to Michigan relaxing it's handling of permits to Carry a Concealed Weapon (CCW) that occured about a year and a half ago from today. The media around here wasn't too for the idea, and they made it sound like every idiot out there could get one. I'm sure you looked up the legal rules behind getting one if this matter concerns you, but I'll repeat some of them here for other Slashdotter's that might not be from Michigan:
Once you meet all this criteria, you're subjected to a 30-90 day waiting period while they evaluate you, and before approval you must appear in front of a board so they can take a look at you and make sure you're not a total nut that talks to himself.
Now, my asterik after the 3 year misdemeanor thing. This means any type of misdemeanor, you know, like an expired license plate, fishing without a proper license (mistakes happen), getting caught with a beer when you're 20 years old.
On top of that, there's a slew of places that you cannot take one into. Namely schools (where they're probably needed most), any establishment that serves alcohol (Pizza Hut, Red Lobster), college classrooms or dorms, and religious worship buildings (unless you have permission). You can carry it to school though, if you stay in your car, and if the child you're dropping off is your own blood child. You can't drop off your step kids though, because people that drop off step kids at school are more likely to pull a gun and start firing that people dropping off their blood children. Or something.
Ah, and to go along with that rule about not taking it anywhere alcohol is served, you can't carry if you've got a BAC at or over 0.02 percent. That's less than a single beer. Come home from work still strapped, have a beer, and then take out the garbage and you'd better remember to remove your weapon before you step out of the house. You're in violation of the law if you don't. Wonderful.
So, if you really think Michigan's full of a bunch of gun toting conservatives you're wrong. It's full of a bunch of liberals who actually tightened the restricions on a CCW while making it look like every nutjob in Michigan could carry a pistol just to scare the snot out of people.
One more point, there's another segment of the population that can carry a gun: criminals. They don't have any of the restrictions the law abiding population does though. Nice that we gave them a list of places where they know good people CAN'T have guns now, isn't it?
Re:Also with effect 31 March... (Score:3, Informative)
No. "cohabit" means "live together".
Newspeak = English: Translation of 750.540c (Score:5, Informative)
Devices covered under this bill are devices intended to:
- Obtain a telecommunications service without paying for it.
- Conceal the existence, origin, or destination of any telecommunications service.
- Do anything with a telecommunications service without the consent of the service provider.
- Hijack a subscriber's telecom access device without his/her consent.
- Counterfeit telecommunications (e.g., cable descramblers).
- A fraudulent or deceptive scheme, pretense, method, or conspiracy, or any device or other means; e.g.:
- Using a fraudulent identification.
- The use of a telecom access device to violate this section by a non-subscriber to exchange anything of value to the subscriber to allow that unlawful use of the telecommunications access device.
What the bill criminalizes:- The assembly, development, manufacturing, possession, delivering, offer of delivery, or advertisement of the aforementioned devices.
- The modification of a device to make it an aforementioned device.
- The delivery, offer of delivery, or advertisement of plans, instructions, or materials for the manufacture, assembly, or development of the aforementioned devices.
Criminal penalties for violating this bill:- Up to 4 years of imprisonment.
- A fine of up to $2,000.
- Both 1 & 2.
- The violator must forfeit the device and receive no compensation.
- The violator must pay restitution.
Important notes:- Violation of this bill is a felony.
- Each aforementioned device constitutes a separate violation. In other words, a person may be sentenced an additional 4 years and $2,000 for each aforementioned device (s)he owns.
- This bill does not affect amateur services licensed by the FCC.
Definitions:- Telecommunications (service provider) -- any service lawfully provided for compensation to facilitate the origination, transmission, retransmission, emission, or reception of intelligible information over a telecommunications system
- Telecommunications access device -- basically, anything which can access, utilize, manipulate, etc a telecom system.
- Telecommunications system -- any system, network, or facility owned or operated by a telecommunications service provider
Those are all defined in section 219a of Michigan's Penal Code. I went to Michican's home-page, and searched for 219a. Unfortunately, only the proposed wording of the bill was offered, and the final bill's language was not. So I had to go to LexisNexis. What a scam to privitive public information. So, this bill covers internet services, telephone services, TV-services, satellite services, an so on and so forth. Since it covers retransmission, it would criminalize the use of WiFi, creating an anti-social community (as RMS says), where helping your neighbor is frowned upon. Even though you are presumably paying for 24-7 full-time use of your broadband, you aren't permitted to use it 24-7 if that means letting other people access your system and use it. Furthermore, you could get up to 4 years in jail for this. Child molesters sometimes don't get 4 years in jail. Additionally, each subsequent violation (e.g., device owned) would get you an additional 4 years if the judge decided that you were to serve the sentences consecutively. This may also criminalize such things as TiVo, since they effectively re-transmit (time-shifting) programmed scheduling to the user at a later time, removing commercials, and do not have the TSP's approval.Re:The Ma Bell similarity (Score:4, Informative)
The Bell System phones (all have a statement stamped in the metal stating "Prop. of Bell System, made by W.E." or something similar) have carbon mics for both mouth- and earpiece. Sound quality shot? Rap the handset against a table to compress the carbon again. The hardware inside is foolproof.
The rotary units don't need lubrication and are true beacons of design elegance and simplicity (they use an eccentric cam to control the pulse speed). The DTMF units used iron cores no chip to fry or die. Even the ringer is impressive.
If you don't want the thing, I'll buy it from you, and I don't care which model it is.