[asterisk-biz] ANI

[Mike Hammett]

You must have meant to reply to someone else because I've been mostly 
non-active in this discussion.  When I have been active, I've been mostly 
neutral.


----------
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Miles Scruggs" <asterisk at wideideas.com>
To: "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion" 
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] ANI


>
> On May 11, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Since when did the big boys not eventually get what they want from the
>> government?
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Alex Balashov
>>>> Bill Michaelson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Miles Scruggs wrote:
>>>>>> `
>>>>>> Welcome to IP baby, you really can't lock it down using the
>>>>>> traditional methods.  As much as you would like to think that the
>>>>>> entity converting the IP to PSTN should/would/could/does correctly
>>>>>> specify the absolute correct ANI/CID it is quite the opposite on a
>>>>>> large scale.  Unless someone dreams up a new way to enforce or
>>>>>> efficiently verify CID/ANI and the big boys actually implement
>>>>>> it this
>>>>>> isn't likely to change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Digital signatures?  a la RSA?
>>>>
>>>> Clever, agile, and very ingenious and all-around open-source
>>>> affirmative
>>>> of you.  But you might have missed the "big boys actually
>>>> implement it"
>>>> part.  :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well a government mandate would make the "Big Boys actually
>>> implement it."
>>>
>>> Let me spoof NSA with DHS ANI and visa versa using WiFi and a hacked
>>> asterisk box.
>>>
>>> E911 was mandated and is semi functional, the government just has to
>>> step in.  They only step in when there are votes on the line or money
>>> (and occasionally public safety, usually for PR reasons)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steve Totaro
>
> I don't get why you or anyone thinks we need a solution to this.  Just
> because something has capacity for exploitation doesn't mean we need
> the government to step in and define an implementation that removes
> the exploitation.  Someone else on this list is convinced that there
> are existing laws against it with penalties (I assume) for violation.
> This is pretty standard for any offenses against others: theft assault
> murder etc.  Asking the government to solve this issue, and enforce a
> solution would be like wanting them to enforce your ISP to check all
> emails leaving their clients to ensure they are actually coming from
> their subscribers.  Looks great on paper, and sure it would cut down
> on spam, but are you ready to bend over and take that up the.....
>
> Dear god am I the only person on this list who thinks the government
> (especially the US gov) is the last entity that we want solving issues
> and enforcing implementations?  I know they have great track record
> and are really good at that sort of thing......  Leave them exactly
> where they are good at.  Defining when it is wrong, and giving those
> that don't obey the smack down, but please don't go inviting them into
> play big brother.
>
> Miles
>
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>