[NTLUG:Discuss] Government Sanctioned Hacking - Full Disclosure

[Merlin]

And in the interest of all fairness and full disclosure, here is the 
counterpoint to the article I just posted.  I don't want to be accused of being 
reactionary, even though that accusation might be accurate *grin*

============
**Counterpoint: Then Come up with Something Better
By Keith Ward

Let’s say you’ve just formed a new band. You’re sure you’ve got what it
takes to set the world on fire; you’re confident your band, the Jelly
Donuts, is going to be the next U2. One problem: You don’t have the
cash to go to Los Angeles, secure that big record contract and get a
label to publish your CD. So you go the homebrew method and record the
album in your basement, then publish it on your Web site.

And you’re right! Your music is a hit with the college crowd, and
you’re afraid that all the downloads will crash your Web server.

But success doesn’t last. The download flood soon slows to a trickle,
as those fresh-faced college kids start copying your rockin’ debut to
each others’ computers. They want the music, but don’t want to pay for
it. After six months, you call your old boss at the car wash back and
tell him that, fortunately, you saved your squeegee.

That’s what Rep. Berman’s bill is about. It’s about making sure you get
paid for the hard work you put into an album, book or movie. And if
you’re on the other end, it’s about responsibility, the moral
responsibility to pay for entertainment you use.

Do I think the bill’s ready to go right now? Certainly not. Many of the
issues Roberta raises are legitimate, if a bit paranoid. For instance,
the “designated, central computer” is, in my opinion, clearly a
Napster-like server that holds all the data, and not an opening for a
government server that will hold your personal information. But
Roberta’s correct in that the bill has the potential of being abused
and infringing on personal rights. That’s why the final form of the
bill needs to be explicit about what can and can’t be done to protect
copyright holders.

But at least it’s a starting point. The stealing—-and that’s plain and
simple what it is—-of copyrighted works needs to be stopped. Sure,
there are laws on the books right now, but they’ve proven to be
pitifully inadequate for the Internet age. Maybe the threat that their
own systems could be vulnerable if they continue to rip off others will
make the infringers think twice.

It’s also worth mentioning that in interviews Berman has indicated he’s
aware of the potential dangers. He’s said that "A copyright owner
should not be allowed to damage the property of a P2P file trader or
any intermediaries, including ISPs", and that "(I) wouldn't want to let
a particularly incensed copyright owner introduce a virus that would
disable the computer from which copyrighted works are made available."
That leads me to believe that he’s willing to listen to others and
refine the bill to take into account privacy concerns.

And so now I lay down the challenge to Roberta: Come up with something
better. You’ve identified a problem; tell us what recommendations you’d
make to Berman. As a consultant, you’ve often had to come up with
creative fixes. Tell us what you’d do. (Fortunately, I’m just a dumb
editor; I don’t have to—-nor could I--solve problems like this. I just
report what other folks are doing.)

If any readers have their own solutions to the problem, I’d be happy to
take them and publish the best ones in upcoming issues of Security
Watch. Make your submission to me and put “P2P file-swapping solution”
in the subject line.

--
Keith Ward, mailto:keith.ward at mcpmag.com, is editor of Security Watch
and senior editor of Microsoft Certified Professional Magazine.
============

-- 
Merlin