Marvin Ammori

I recommend this article, for anyone who wants better to understand some basics of Internet transmission technology. Have you wondered the difference between DSL, cable modem service, fiber, and wireless? Dale Hatfield explains it all.

Based on these technological realities, he also makes an interesting policy argument in the last paragraph: while government policy is targeting the clearing of spectrum, it should also encourage increased build-out of fiber lines closer and closer to residential homes. This build-out is important for increasing capacity for wireline networks, but also for  wireless networks, complimenting our spectrum policies.

Dan Gallagher of WSJ’s Digits blog discusses the dilemma facing Verizon and AT&T in determining their 4G pricing scheme, with particular attention paid to the issue of data usage caps.

Todd Bishop over at TechFlash reports on the findings of a carrier speed test conducted by RootMetrics at CES.

Demonstrations & protests over unemployment & poor living conditions have been ongoing in Tunisia since the beginning of December, but last week the Tunisian government turned up the heat on bloggers, activists, & dissidents by launching a JavaScript injection attack that siphoned off the usernames and passwords of Tunsians logging in to Google, Yahoo, and Facebook.

Geoff Huston at CircleID discusses the technical developments the Internet has undergone this past year, and makes a few predictions based on those findings.

Gail Harris writing for ISN Insights discusses the issues facing US Cyber Command now and in the future.

Jeffrey Carr over at Forbes’ Digital Dao blog reports that the Iranian Parliament has ordered the Basij (Iran’s voluntary paramilitary corps) to increase recruitment of hackers to “fight the ‘soft war’ in cyberspace.”  Carr speculates that we may see this cost-effective policy replicated quickly develop across the globe.

Meg Beasley at Federal News Radio reports on the creation of a National Program Office within the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology, which “will be in charge of coordinating efforts between the government and private industry” to ensure that the environment for online transactions is more secure.

(hat tip – cyberwar)

I decided to write up some thoughts on Wikileaks.

Many of our nation’s landmark free speech decisions are not about heroes–several are about flag-burners, racists, Klansmen, and those with political views outside the mainstream. And yet we measure our commitment to freedom of speech, in part, by our willingness to protect even their rights despite disagreement with what they say, and why they say it.

The story of Wikileaks publishing U.S. diplomatic cables has become the story of Julian Assange: is he a hero or villain, a high-tech terrorist or enemy combatant? Should the U.S., which may have already empanelled a grand jury in Virginia, prosecute him as a criminal under the Espionage Act of 1917 or under the computer fraud and abuse act?

Though I have spent years advocating for Internet freedom, I don’t think Assange is a hero for leaking these diplomatic cables.  According to plausible reports, the leaks have harmed U.S. interests, made the work of U.S. diplomats more difficult, likely endangered lives of allies, and may have set back democracy in Zimbabwe and perhaps elsewhere.  Even some of Assange’s friends at Wikileaks are doubting Assange’s heroism: a few left him to launch a rival site and to write a tell-all book.  Whatever the harms of secrecy and over-classification, Assange’s actions have caused tremendous damage.  No wonder polls show nearly 60% of Americans believe the U.S. should arrest Assange and charge him with a crime.

My initial reaction was similar.  I thought that if a case could be made against Assange, one should be made.

But, as time passed, the political and legal downsides of prosecution came into clearer focus, and I am rethinking that initial reaction.  Despite still believing Assange’s actions have been harmful, I have now come to the opposite conclusion—not for the benefit of Assange, but for the benefit of Americans and of the United States.

Prosecuting Assange could do more harm than good for our freedom of the press and would inflict further harm on diplomatic effectiveness.  Despite the appeal of prosecuting Assange, it is not worth the cost.  We will not get the cables back.  We will not deter aspiring Wikileakers, as both our allies and our enemies know.  We will, as Dean Geoffrey Stone has best articulated, likely sacrifice established principles of freedom of the press in doing so.

Here are some thoughts on why we should think twice about prosecuting Assange, categorized by harms to the U.S.’s freedom of the press and then harms to America’s diplomatic effectiveness. And, in advance, I thank the many scholars, policy experts, and friends who took the time to give me thoughts on earlier drafts of this post.

Continue reading →