[liberationtech] /. ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection

[Rich Kulawiec]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 01:11:08PM -0500, Nicholas Judd wrote:
> If I could tap into your hive-mind intelligence for a moment to help me
> be more precise about explaining why this is an issue, I would appreciate it ...

Others have articulated a number of reasons for this already,
so I'll attempt to avoid re-covering the same ground, and instead
focus on something that I don't think has come up.

What happens to all the data gathered during DPI?  Surely it isn't
thrown away, as that would remove some of the reason for gathering
it in the first place.  No, it's certain to be collected and stored.

Where will it be stored?

How will it be stored?

Who will have access to it?

What will it be used for?

Will it be secured?

Actually, I can answer that last one, and the answer is "no", because
there's no reason for those involved to make any effort to secure it,
therefore the money/time/effort to do so won't be spent.  And when the
inevitable security breach occurs, the designated spokesliar will stand
at the podium and use the favorite phrase for such situations: "nobody
could have foreseen" -- even though we can all see it coming.

This is a specific case of a more general problem: people who think
they're building tools/weapons when they're really building targets...
very attractive, highly useful, much-sought-after targets.  I wrote
about that issue in a related context here:

	https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120222/01562717837/how-new-internet-spying-laws-will-actually-enable-stalkers-spammers-phishers-yes-pedophiles-terrorists.shtml

Most of what that piece says applies in this case as well.

---rsk