IP: Feds will data tap under CALEA

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "PAUL JULIEN" <p.julien () worldnet att net>
> To: <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: Feds will data tap under CALEA
> Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 12:48:49 -0400
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
>
> Dave:
>
> > From the article below:
> "Communications companies carrying packet data have until Sept. 30 to
> demonstrate that their systems will permit law enforcement officials to
> conduct wiretaps. "
>
> Paul Julien
> Rutherford NJ
>
>
> *
>
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2773783,00.html
>
> Unresolved Issues Dog Fed's Data-Tap Efforts
> By Doug Brown, Interactive Week
> June 11, 2001
>
>
> Rapid changes in communications technology threaten to make "a big mess" out
> of the federal government's ambitious plans to weave wiretapping into the
> fabric of the digital age, while a 1994 law grows increasingly outdated.
>
> While parts of the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act
> (CALEA) have already been implemented by phone and other communications
> carriers, important areas of the law are being disputed in courtrooms and
> mulled over by bureaucrats in the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the
> Federal Communications Commission.
>
> One unresolved issue is how to handle packet data, a technology that was in
> its infancy when the law was written, but has since emerged as the leading
> method for transmitting voice and data in the Internet age.
>
> Communications companies carrying packet data have until Sept. 30 to
> demonstrate that their systems will permit law enforcement officials to
> conduct wiretaps. The industry has filed requests with the FCC to extend the
> deadline. The FBI argues that extensions should not be granted. Industry
> representatives say they need to figure out a way to separate the packets'
> header data from content before they can implement any standards, and the
> technological solution to the problem could take years to figure out. It's
> up to the FCC to decide how to proceed.
>
> "We believe the packet issue is going to be around for a long time," said
> Rodney Small, an economist in the FCC's office of engineering and technology
> who handles CALEA. Industry has "decided it's too expensive to do this, and
> they aren't sure what the privacy implications are," Small said. "They are
> getting cold feet, legally and financially. Meanwhile, these new
> technologies keep developing. . . . On the packet data [issue], there could
> be more petitions and it could be a big mess."
>
> An industry official agreed. "You will see more lawsuits or court
> challenges. You'll certainly see carriers filing extensions on packet data
> deadlines," said Grant Seiffert, vice president of external affairs and
> global policy at the Telecommunications Industry Association, a trade group
> representing many telecommunications carriers implicated in the CALEA
> regulations. "In a packet world, somebody has to open the packet to look for
> the information the FBI is seeking. Is the FBI going to do it? We're not
> going to do it unless we are paid to do it. Who is going to be looking over
> everyone's shoulders when we open up this information?"
>
> As the packet data issue looms, industry and civil liberties advocates await
> signals from the Bush administration about how new regulators - particularly
> FCC commissioners and the new FBI director - plan to approach government
> surveillance issues. The agencies' decisions could affect the depth of the
> debates.
>
> "Congress may be re-engaged," Seiffert said. "It's sort of a wait-and-see
> game right now."
>
> "The FBI's credibility is at an all-time low here," said Barry Steinhardt,
> associate director at the American Civil Liberties Union. "Attorney General
> [John] Ashcroft in the Senate expressed skepticism about a number of
> government surveillance programs."
>
> An FBI spokesman defended work to date, saying: "There has been significant
> progress made with the implementation of CALEA," and citing technical
> solutions available for wireline and wireless segments of the telecom
> industry.
>
> Some CALEA experts question some of what the FBI has managed to implement
> already, charging that the agency installed sophisticated data collection
> systems in communications networks that require expensive equipment to
> decipher.
>
> "It's close to a scandal," said Stewart Baker, an attorney and former
> general counsel at the National Security Agency who has been involved with
> legal challenges to CALEA. "After industry has spent all of this money, it
> turns out it's generating all of this data that has to be translated by
> special-purpose machines that have to be bought by local law enforcement.
> This may have the effect of pricing wiretaps out of the market for a lot of
> smaller jurisdictions."
>
> Baker also said that while CALEA is supposed to apply only to voice
> communications, the FBI has been "pretty aggressive" when it delves into the
> packet data realm, "trying to persuade people who build data networks that
> sooner or later they will have to provide wiretap capability."
>
> "A year ago, when times were good, everybody leaned towards the view that it
> was better to not pick a fight with the FBI," Baker said. "Now it's less
> clear that people have the funds to spend on development or to purchase this
> stuff, so there could be a serious conflict over this and there is certainly
> a difficult question for people who are building Internet Protocol systems."



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/