[SECURITY]

[Kevin Wilcox <wilcoxkm () APPSTATE EDU>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 12/06/15 06:31, Berman, Mark wrote:

> Bottom line, it's a lot easier to declare yourself exempt than to
> spend money on hardware to try and comply. As far as I know this
> has never been litigated and until it is and a judge says I'm
> wrong, I'll stand on that opinion.

Considering the OTHER benefits you get from having a compliant
network, like being able to identify your users, accounting for each
system on the network, accounting for WHERE each system is on the
network, etc., I would argue that compliance with CALEA is a
side-effect of a well-designed network. If you're worried about what
you'll need to change to be CALEA-compliant, you're already losing in
other critical areas.

kmw
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAlV66gAACgkQsKMTOtQ3fKE3ZgCgoyIONFJitPYYTNq8Gu/lBfSo
XT4An0KeXh0spX4Kb2UTpICaJWHdKy5h
=5h+o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----