Net War, Part II: Deleting the Kill Switch

to this ongoing series on the Internet.

The first article discussed how the internet functioned in a rather rudimentary way, and broke down several vulnerabilities a modern day cyber attacker may use to gain entrance into private digital domains of companies, governments, and..well, you.

You may rest easy, however, if you understand how large the internet truly is....the victim of the attack is usually also the vector for entryway. So if you envision some hacker "randomly" gaining entrance into your digital world, be aware that "random" is seldom the case.

This is why safe practices must be observed.

Because the internet is so damned big--security through obscurity is the first layer of "protection" many people often put too much stock in.

A hacker, you see, usually has a goal in mind when focusing on a target.

It is their job to determine what information is where and how easily to access it.

Many companies assume that keeping their network topology secret (as in..what this server does, where this database is located, etc..) is a valid defense. It's not. Because no matter how confusing your network may seem to your employees, a seasoned hacker has the ability and patience to lay out all the relevant links in order to succeed.

Before advanced security detection algorithms, firewalls, virus scanners, and other kit hit the market gaining entry into a network could be as simple as finding the right person to call.

And that someone is never a knowledgeable person--in fact, the less they know, the better.

Now that the internet revolution has been fruitfully commoditized, the number of systems hooked in is so vast one could possibly just enter a range of addresses, and hit "scan." And now that the internet isn't so dial-up based, hackers don't even need to mess with the telephone company, which traditionally limited netside browsing because you not only had to pay for the online service, but the phone charges too. Or, perfect methods of fooling the telco.

Today your species still is finding new objects to network--anything from refrigerators to pace makers. If it has circuitry, it just may need it's own little point in cyberspace. Cyberspace is flat, too. It doesn't have boarders, taxes, or immigration policies.

And cyberspace--the medium through which virtually all communication travels through at one point or another--is now not only a wire to send goods through, but a mechanism that also computes and crunches data, too.

In essence the time to envision the internet as a "telephone system for communication" has passed. The Internet is no longer simply a network--it's an artificial organism.

It may stretch your imagination to perceive silicon, fiber optics, radio waves, satellites, and Ethernet cable as an "organism" in the traditional sense.

But as networked devices are perfected, many go online with the help of a human hand, never to need another again. Except of course for electricity. In space-time, computers will shortly be creating better versions of themselves for humans. And software, too, will find it's self evolving beyond the constraints of human interaction.

You and I--we're just part of this massive web. Without us it wouldn't exist. It's an amazing device, with limitless possibilities. The nature of the internet is to be open, unrestricted, and on the best of days, untouched by regulation.

Businesses don't like this. Governments fear information that is uncontrollable.

The Internet, many would have you believe, has several issues to fix.

Number one, of course, is the very key feature that makes the internet so awesome: to date, there is very little regulation governing the internet. Lobbyists and corporate-backed politicians have been trying to change this in various countries, but so far, have been largely unsuccessful.

And it's imperative that this continues.

Remember: The Internet isn't a liability to humanity, humanity is a liability to the internet.

To further illustrate my point, I shall touch base on two legal issues affecting the freedoms of internet users in the United States.

Before S. 3804, better known as the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act," began it's life cycle, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was signed into law by Bill Clinton and Co.

While some of you may have an appreciation for what it's "supposed" to do--protect content creators from infringement, more of you will have sob stories of how the DMCA has actually done anything but.

You see, in order for a piece of legislation to work, it has to be enforceable. That's a key concept with laws, you know, because if it isn't feasible you shouldn't write it out. Well, since it's debut the RIAA and MPAA have effectively used it to sue dead grandmothers and children for downloading music and movies. (Among other more living potential customers who may or may not have "stolen" music.)

What some may not know is that the DMCA legislation has been broadly used by companies--some of the very same companies who "donated" to congress--to sue the pants off of individual users, disallowing fair use.

It's a criminal piece of legislation that actively forfeits free speech to protect the interests of corporations, and not even necessarily the creators of the content locked up into this scheme themselves.

My dear Kari has invoked DMCA take down notices on content that has been copied by her hubs. But let me ask you a question--what sort of DRM does HubPages have?

I don't disagree that there should be an affective means of enforcing copyright claims, I just don't believe the DMCA is it. In fact, this is just the first attempt of many, and the latest is slated to step back into the Senate on the 18th of November, 2010.

COICA it's self is a small piece of legislation. There's been a lot of ballyhoo about a particular part which would have called for two internet blacklists, and one would have been trivial to end up on.

Nevertheless, even if this bill is slightly altered, the same corporate money is paying those in the Senate to push this effort through.

Right now, some of you will cry in outrage and claim I'm some hippie liberal looking for drastic copyright reform. I'm not. I'd like it to stay the way it was, and that's why I urge you to further investigate COICA yourself.

As the video above explains, even if some measures are used in the COICA bill frivolously, there are ways, ever evolving technology, to circumvent these problems.

They'll never shut the internet off entirely--it's too useful to them--but they will use this legislation, combined with the DMCA, and ream a bunch of innocent fair using individuals.

It's not truly an issue of copyright: these laws could affect far and wide how you can create, transmit, receive, and store your digital content. It's an issue of user freedom.

If you lose these, the devices that already try to cripple your access to hidden or locked features will have even less competition to worry about, and more leverage come gavel.

This translates into far less commercial enterprises selling media, and could potentially reshape the entertainment industry and set it back to a time when the internet never existed.

I'll also show you some information about Patrick Leahy, who hails from Vermont. If it matters, and bare in mind I'm a free market anarchist, he's a Democrat. Either way, I seldom take stock in political matters based on party. I follow the money, honey.

So here we go:

I urge you to check out Maplight, and also, OpenSecrets.org. These organizations track political power based on dollar flow.

If you live in Vermont, Patrick Leahy's office number is 202-224-4242.

There was also a gentleman from Utah who co-presented the bill originally, and his name is Orrin Hatch. He's a republican. (See why I don't bother with political parties?) His top five contributors aren't in media or internet. However, in position six you find that computers/internet companies have donated $232,027. Not a bad chunk of change.

His number one contributor, on a side note, gave $686,755. That was from pharma and health care industries.

So if you live in Utah, give the guy a call, his phone number is 202-224-5251.

Tell them you DO NOT support COICA.

If you wish to speak with your state senator to find out their stance on S.3804, here's a link to find their perspective numbers:

Digging deeper into who else has co-sponsored the bill, and who is on the subcommittee that is nursing it back to health for another shot provides familiar names.

There's sixteen co-sponsors, and nineteen people on the Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

Under the DMCA if a complaint is filed against you, you'll find that whatever site hosts your content will be more often or not prompted to take down the work cited as infringing upon an original work.

This means that unlike "normal" logical legal procedures, you're essentially guilty until proven innocent.

COICA would provide much the same measure of swiftness, but do it's best to force any US-based registered domain, ISP, and payment processing services to drop the IP connection of your website (192.168.1.1 for example) so it doesn't resolve into a domain, like www.YourName.com.

Corporations as well as individuals have shown they cannot use the DMCA correctly, but servers of content want nothing to do with this battle. You're on your own here.

So, act today against COICA (and it's predecessor ACTA), and spread the truth about the DMCA.

If this legislation passes, furthering the goals of the corporate elite, expect some quirky transitions. As an enterprising computer user, I not only urge you to discover more ways to hide your activities online, I recommend that as a society you should focus on ways to increase privacy, disallowing eavesdropping by law as well as technologically.

Unless, of course, said person has a proven criminal record, and a legitimate wire tap warrant is served.

No governing body should be forced by corporations to artificially impose limits on the internet. These limits will ultimately fail, and cause more pain for the government and their corporations than they will be prepared for.

So if COICA does succeed?

Hunker down for more netwar.