[asterisk-biz] ANI

[Bill Michaelson]

Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 16:32 -0400, Bill Michaelson wrote:
>   
>> Referring back to my earlier suggestion about public key
>> authentication, a more widespread appreciation and understanding of
>> it's applicability in various realms would go a long way toward
>> helping solve many problems ranging from spam and phishing to stuff
>> like this.  It's a mind-share/social problem.  There is nothing
>> inherently wrong with spoofing; the problems arise when the receiver
>> is unduly deceived.
>>     
>
>
> that only works if you can trust the key holders.  Someone has to have
> your public key and be trusted so that you know its real, and not a fake
> one.  Yes you can cache it once you have had contact but not first
> contact.  
>   
Yes, of course, just as this is an issue with web browsers.
> Further when you get phone calls that are authenticated on each end as
> to whom you are talking there will be abuses.  It will be used as a
> method of surveilance and tracking by governments, presumably it will be
> a smart card type device and not the phone itself, and when you go from
> phone to phone you will ultimately be required to insert it to prove
> identity. 
Maybe.
>  After all this will help stop drug dealers, child
> pornographers and terrorists right?  (those are the 3 claims that most
> of the tracking laws have used for the last 15-20 years).  
>   
Those are favorite excuses for increased surveillance, I agree.
> But it wont stop there, this can help stop credit card theft on the
> intarweb, so it will be mandated that you use it there too, meaning you
> wont be able to do anything online anonymous, because you will have to
> authenticate with your card.  Why stop there, make it some type of RFID
> system so that they can monitor who you are as you drive down the road
> (michelin has a plan to put RFIDs in tires and claim they can be read
> upto 90mph so its not just a random theory).
>
> While you arent proposing all of this, think for a second about how many
> governments have been clamoring for something like this.  End to end
> authentication is not always a good thing, it may be helpful in a couple
> of situations but at what cost?
>   
You make a good point - essentially that the widespread acceptance and 
facility of this technology also facilitates abuse of another sort. I 
agree that anonymity should be available. Would it necessarily eliminate 
all channels of anonymous communication? I don't think that is a 
foregone conclusion (nor do I think you are really suggesting it is).


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20080513/6c98ec87/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3221 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20080513/6c98ec87/attachment-0001.bin