<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffff99" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Miles Scruggs wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:EC138CC1-74A9-459A-8115-A99A9BE90D2A@wideideas.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On May 11, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Since when did the big boys not eventually get what they want from the
government?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Alex Balashov
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Bill Michaelson wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Miles Scruggs wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">`
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.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Digital signatures? a la RSA?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">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. :-)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">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
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I don't get why you or anyone thinks we need a solution to this.</pre>
</blockquote>
It's a discussion of possibilities. That's all.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:EC138CC1-74A9-459A-8115-A99A9BE90D2A@wideideas.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> 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? </pre>
</blockquote>
Why do you feel so alone? Take a breath. Relax. Now read the thread
again, carefully. There are a variety of suggestions and ideas, few
conclusions, and your inferences about people's positions are overblown.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:EC138CC1-74A9-459A-8115-A99A9BE90D2A@wideideas.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> 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 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.api-digital.com">http://www.api-digital.com</a>--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>