Unsecured wifi might be contributory negligence
bdm at fenrir.org.uk
Fri Feb 24 16:21:27 GMT 2012
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:34:52 +0000
Ian Batten <igb at batten.eu.org> wrote:
> On 24 Feb 2012, at 13:52, Roland Perry wrote:
> > In article <8EA7ED0D-A4F2-4A6A-8B0D-4D6DB4BEFBB3 at batten.eu.org>,
> > Ian Batten <igb at batten.eu.org> writes
> >> I think we can safely say that legislation that forces end users to
> >> keep evidential logs of activity on their private networks is
> >> (a) unlikely (b) unenforceable and (c) unimplementable.
> > The way you persuade people to do it, is a presumption that the
> > subscriber was the offender, in the absence of logs. Whether it'll
> > never happen - who knows. The Internet is in its infancy.
> That places a burden on the end user which is completely
> unacceptable. For a start off, the logs would have to be
> tamper-proof in some way, and contain "truth". Who would appear in
> court to attest to the accuracy of the logs?
Well, justice doesn't often seem to believe in establishing truth, it's
too busy sending a message pour encourager les autres...
More information about the ukcrypto