Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
Major Variola (ret)
mv at cdc.gov
Tue Jul 6 21:40:29 PDT 2004
At 02:47 PM 7/6/04 -0700, Hal Finney wrote:
>> Messages in storage have much lower judicial protection than messages
>> transit. (This does not have much technical merit, in the current
>> atmosphere of "damn the laws - there are terrorists around the
>> but can be seen as a nice little potential benefit.)
>One thing I haven't understood in all the commentary is whether law
>enforcment still needs a warrant to access emails stored in this way.
>Apparently the ISP can read them without any notice or liability, but
>what about the police?
You are state meat, whether 5150'd or not.
>Also, what if you run your own mail spool, so the email is never stored
>at the ISP, it just passes through the routers controlled by the ISP
>(just like it passed through a dozen other routers on the internet).
>Does this give the ISP (and all the other router owners) the right to
>read your email? I don't think so, it seems like that would definitely
>cross over the line from "mail in storage" to "mail in transit".
If you think the cable landings in Va/Md are coincidental, you are
smoking something I've run out of. Its all recorded. I'm sure the
and database groups in Ft. Meade will get a chuckle out of your
"the right to" idioms.
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy