|
|
| Author |
Message |
FBI
Guru
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 1494
Location: Federation Of Bored IRC'ers
|
 Posted: May 11, 2006 5:23pm Post subject: Re: +I and Legality |
 |
|
| nenolod wrote: | With all of this talk of +I lately, I have decided to do some research on the topic.
+I qualifies as wiretapping, under US law, and is thus illegal even on private systems (yes! private systems included! Some company just got sued for snooping on phone conversations via their corporate PBX, so yes, wiretapping is not allowed on private systems.).
In addition, vendors providing tools for wiretapping to non-government contacts are violating yet another law. This means that +I patches could be potentially illegal in the US, and that developing them could be classified as illegal as well.
So, the topic for this thread is: "What laws in other countries do you feel would be relative to +I?"
Arguments can be made either way, either in favour of +I or not in favour.
After all, if we're going to bicker about +I, lets do it in some sort of intellectually stimulating manner other than "lolz +I suks cuz they can wch mi cybar the other irc cop for free o:linez."
- nenolod |
We aren't companies just a bunch of IRC Addicts who run networks out of there own pockets offering free services....
The Internet can be monitored by a cetrain extent but the US Department of Justice got better things to do then go network to network seeing who has +I and who hasn't....
Who would have the brains to give out there Social Security Numbers or bank accounts or personal infomation? No one...
Even if you do I doubt the Network Owner or anyone else would want to use the infomation....They probaly forget about it IF they do and do some damage they can be arrested for sure so no point in having some sort of crime squad moinotoring networks with +I... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ARcanUSNUMquam
none
Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: May 11, 2006 5:49pm Post subject: |
|
|
This might seem like a stupid question, but what is +I? Is it on Unreal? Only thing on Unreal that I can is the channel mode +I
| Quote: | | I <nick!ident@host> = Overrides +i for matching users [h] |
That doesnt seem like wiretapping to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FBI
Guru
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 1494
Location: Federation Of Bored IRC'ers
|
| Posted: May 11, 2006 5:59pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ARcanUSNUMquam wrote: | This might seem like a stupid question, but what is +I? Is it on Unreal? Only thing on Unreal that I can is the channel mode +I
| Quote: | | I <nick!ident@host> = Overrides +i for matching users [h] |
That doesnt seem like wiretapping to me. |
+I is invisible which makes you Invisible no one can see you so basically if a Services Admin has +I on himself and he can join any channel and spy on people without anyone knowing he is there... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FuRiOuS
Lurker
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: May 11, 2006 6:28pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FBI wrote: | | ARcanUSNUMquam wrote: | This might seem like a stupid question, but what is +I? Is it on Unreal? Only thing on Unreal that I can is the channel mode +I
| Quote: | | I <nick!ident@host> = Overrides +i for matching users [h] |
That doesnt seem like wiretapping to me. |
+I is invisible which makes you Invisible no one can see you so basically if a Services Admin has +I on himself and he can join any channel and spy on people without anyone knowing he is there... |
To expand on this description, you can join and part rooms freely and no one is the wiser, you do not appear on nicklists, and are not seen in the room unless you choose to speak, then you are discovered. The channel mode +i is something completely seperate that's different from the user mode +I. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PingBad
Guru
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 2007
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: May 11, 2006 9:35pm Post subject: Re: +I and Legality |
|
|
| nenolod wrote: | | +I qualifies as wiretapping, under US law, and is thus illegal even on private systems |
IRC != America, as has been said on numerous occasions in history. I, for example, am a citizen of New Zealand, and after searching local and nation laws, the only law regarding any form of interception is this. Thus, if I was to run a network and, for the sake of network integrity and security, if I chose to use usermode +I to effect this, it would be perfectly legal for me to do so.
Maybe you should consider the global stage before making such blanket statements about IRC, nenolod
my $0.05 (frikken tax!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FuRiOuS
Lurker
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: May 12, 2006 7:03am Post subject: Re: +I and Legality |
|
|
| PingBad wrote: |
my $0.05 (frikken tax!) |
rofl Tell me about it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouselike
Lurker
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: May 12, 2006 12:26pm Post subject: |
|
|
| magpie wrote: | The following is a quote from the website of the Information Commissioner's Office:
"If you are an individual and you hold information about others, but only do so for personal, family or household reasons (including recreational purposes) then neither the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) nor the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) impose any legal obligations on you." |
I am confused by that, so that means unless they are using +I to log/spy for personal, family, household or recreational purposes then it is illegal to do so within the uk at least when using +I unless it were for the above mentioned?
Another thing i find disturbing is kids under 16 use irc, i know they shouldnt under strict guidelines being pushed by ads, even i did at 11, but surely with them being under the legal age to consent to anything about data logging or storring then they would either have to be removed from the network/server or the oper could not spy on them.
Also the part about consetting to data being stored, if they dont consent to it within/under uk law does it mean the above/same quote apply to them?
One other thing, does it the user connecting have to agree to their own country laws or the laws of the country the server is hosted in.
[offtopic]
magpie when is (if it's in the pipeline) qnet going to introduce ssl seeing as we are on about user privacy, id make well use of ssl on qnet if it ever came available.
[/offtopic] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magpie
Idler
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 454
Location: Essex, UK
|
| Posted: May 12, 2006 12:42pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suspect the vast majority of people with logging enabled in their IRC clients have it enabled for personal recreational uses - that is, I have logging enabled in case I need to recall a conversation, etc. However, if you were going to use the data for marketing purposes, and it could potentially be used to identify people, then you would fall under the Data Protection Act.
As per the under 16 year olds, what do the instant messaging networks do about it? They're far more of a target, legally, than an IRC network.
As per QuakeNet, I haven't been staff there for some time now. However, SSL will probably be added if and when Undernet add it. Personally I'm not really that fussed about SSL for IRC client connections. Any conversations in a public channel are visible by anybody, those in private channels may be compromised by users connecting via not SSL enabled ports (yes, this can be mitigated with yet more channel modes) and if you're simply using it for encrypted one-to-one conversations there are far better methods of doing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nenolod
Idler
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 332
Location: A box!
|
| Posted: May 12, 2006 2:18pm Post subject: Re: +I and Legality |
|
|
| PingBad wrote: | | nenolod wrote: | | +I qualifies as wiretapping, under US law, and is thus illegal even on private systems |
IRC != America, as has been said on numerous occasions in history. I, for example, am a citizen of New Zealand, and after searching local and nation laws, the only law regarding any form of interception is this. Thus, if I was to run a network and, for the sake of network integrity and security, if I chose to use usermode +I to effect this, it would be perfectly legal for me to do so.
Maybe you should consider the global stage before making such blanket statements about IRC, nenolod
my $0.05 (frikken tax!) |
I seriously have nothing to say here. PingBad -- you should reread my post more carefully, I was merely stating that there are laws in the US that could potentially apply to use of +I.
There are also laws in the US that go the other way.
The entire point of this thread was to have a comparitive relating to laws of the US, and other countries where people run IRCds from.
However, that was still a good find in NZ law none the less.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PingBad
Guru
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 2007
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: May 17, 2006 9:55pm Post subject: Re: +I and Legality |
|
|
[offtopic] | nenolod wrote: | | However, that was still a good find in NZ law none the less. |
What I did find disgusted me tho... what are we coming to when the citizens of a country can't trust its govt, and the govt can't trust the citizens?[/offtopic] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magpie
Idler
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 454
Location: Essex, UK
|
| Posted: May 18, 2006 3:08am Post subject: |
|
|
| When was the last time you actually trusted a government? :) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FuRiOuS
Lurker
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: May 18, 2006 12:46pm Post subject: |
|
|
| magpie wrote: | | When was the last time you actually trusted a government? |
/me searches past calenders frantically for the date....I know I marked it down in the history books.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JasonC
none
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Jun 18, 2006 12:08am Post subject: |
|
|
| I think stealth mode is fine as long as it is used for a good purpose (e.g. botnets, doing something wrong). I don't care about the legalities, it is my network, I'll do what I want to get rid of troublesome/harmful users. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marc
Lurker
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Posts: 161
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Jun 18, 2006 5:42am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok. Usually I bitch and harp on like an old grandmother. But tonight I'm gonna keep it short and sweet.
A private conversation between two peers should be that. PRIVATE.
A private channel on a network should be that. PRIVATE.
I see the useful sides of having the +I, but I also see the sides of if the user knew that they could be spied upon at anytime, why be there?
If it's not illegal in all countries, in the ones it isn't illegal in it would still be unethical. How would you like your private conversations being watched in real time?
As for those kiddies with botnets, isnt that what umode +c is for? (+s +cF /snomask) or even #Services where the cool bots that do alsorts of random stuff (eg: ConnectServ) is located...
geeze. It may or may not be illegal, but its damn right wrong.
EOF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FBI
Guru
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 1494
Location: Federation Of Bored IRC'ers
|
| Posted: Jun 18, 2006 12:01pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whats wrong with spying with +I? :p
The CIA does it all the time... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Register
Log in
