[iwar] [fc:Recording.industry.'copyright.DoS.attack'.rumored]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-18 08:52:47


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-3104-1003420370-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 18 Oct 2001 08:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 19696 invoked by uid 510); 18 Oct 2001 15:53:43 -0000
Received: from n12.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.62) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 18 Oct 2001 15:53:43 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-3104-1003420370-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.53] by n12.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Oct 2001 15:54:05 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 18 Oct 2001 15:52:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 24436 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2001 15:52:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Oct 2001 15:52:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Oct 2001 15:52:48 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id IAA14824 for iwar@onelist.com; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 08:52:47 -0700
Message-Id: <200110181552.IAA14824@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 08:52:47 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Recording.industry.'copyright.DoS.attack'.rumored]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Recording industry 'copyright DoS attack' rumored 
By Thomas C Greene,  The Register, 10/18/2001
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/22327.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/22327.html>

We know the entertainment industry has sought to slip language into
current anti-terror legislation which could result in blanket immunity
from prosecution for hacking file-sharing networks. 
We know the entertainment industry fervently desires to parlay the
secular sacrament of copyright into a monopoly on content production and
distribution, and ultimately extend it to extort consumers with some
sort of pay-per-use DRM scheme. 
So it's easy to believe that, after being spurned by Congress in its bid
to hack with impunity, the industry would settle for the next best
thing: shutting down file-shares with DoS attacks. 
No intrusion; no destruction of data. Just tie up the rogue network with
automated download requests, and so stop the suspected infringer from
sharing with the public. 
This, we are told, is precisely what the recording industry is plotting,
according to a ZD-Net story entitled "RIAA: We'll smother song swappers"
by John Borland. 
Citing "sources at the Recording Industry Association of America
(RIAA)," Borland tells us that the scheme is under consideration. It's
apparently being shopped to the RIAA by opportunistic software vendors.

"According to industry sources, the technology is being provided by
outside technology companies and has not yet found its way into wide
use." 
Too vague by half, except that the RIAA's recent legislative debacle has
primed us to believe it. Had it not been for that, we might just be a
bit more skeptical. 
So for fun, let's pretend that this item came along out of the blue. Are
we satisfied with this 'according to sources' and 'outside technology
companies' business? 
Wouldn't we like to know what sort of sources? Sure, they want to remain
anonymous, and that's fine. We're not asking for names in print. But
what are we talking about here? A senior executive? A middle manager? A
secretary? A receptionist? A janitor? 
And what's up with this 'technology companies' business? Why not name
names in this case? Companies don't have any right to anonymity. If a
company is trying to sell a DoS tool to the RIAA, the public deserves to
know who they are. 
And what sort of technology do they deal in? DRM, perhaps? Is it a big
company traded on the NYSE? Is it a startup? Is it a couple of Linux
kids from the local high-school maths club? 
Too vague by half. ®

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:55 PST