Networking in Africa...

David Charlap David.Charlap at
Tue Dec 3 19:05:33 UTC 2002

David Schwartz wrote:
> 	If you want to do this, your notification has to be explicit. I suggest, 
> "You have no privacy here. Everything you are doing is being logged." Notice 
> that when you tell people the truth, it starts looking less like what you 
> wanted to do in the first place.

Well, that makes it sound like you are a pervert that enjoys reading 
everybody else's e-mail.

The language can be a bit better than that.  You're right, you should 
say that all outgoing web forms are intercepted and recorded.  But you 
can add additional statements to the extent that you won't be reading 
through that information unless it's part of following up on complaints 
of abuse, or at the request of law enforcement.

I'm not trying to establish rules carved in stone, and I'm not trying to 
play lawyer.  I was trying to attempt a possible solution to the problem 
of these spams coming from anonymous-access terminals in public places 
via web-based mail systems.

Since web-mail doesn't have a fixed protocol to filter/monitor, you have 
to take a different approach.  You can't block all possible vectors, 
since that would essentially block all traffic.  One possibility is 
monitoring and logging in order to preserving evidence for possible 
future investigations.  Yes it may be seen as invasive, but what other 
choice is there if your network is routinely being abused by felons?

So far, I haven't seen anybody else post even a vague idea of a solution 
to this problem.  Of course, as a network operator, you don't have to 
care - you can just cut off the service of any cafe owner who can't 
figure out a solution on his own.

-- David

More information about the NANOG mailing list