Monitoring, Flow Stats (Re: spam whore, norcal-systems)

Ravi Pina ravi at
Mon Feb 1 23:39:20 UTC 1999

On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 06:16:58PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 05:54:36PM -0500, Dean Anderson wrote:
> > This kind of monitoring is probably a direct violation of 18 USC 2511, as
> > is a public announcement of the monitoring results. Indeed, at present, I'd
> > say it appears to be the best example of an unauthorized 3rd party
> > violation I've seen so far. (most [all previous] people don't admit
> > details, but we know some do it). Unless of course you have authorization
> > from norcal or all the recipients of those 2 million packets to monitor.
> > Since norcal isn't your customer, I don't suppose you have any paper
> > showing they gave you permission to collect and publish information about
> > their traffic.
> 	Interesting coroloary,
> 	Is it illegal for me to do flow-stats, as that examines packets
> (in the same way one would filter), causing this data to be stored on
> my flow stats server?

For those of you playing at home, this document can be found at:

This would appear to be covered in sec 18 USC 2511(2)(a)

Then again, I'm no lawyer, and I really don't have the brain capacity
to follow the threading of USC.

I'm sorry if this was a boo boo move on my part.


More information about the NANOG mailing list