more on House hearings on CALEA

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "sbaker () steptoe com" <sbaker () steptoe com>
Date: September 10, 2004 9:14:56 AM EDT
To: "'dave () farber net'" <dave () farber net>
Cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <SAlbertazzie () steptoe com>
Subject: RE: [IP] House hearings on CALEA

Dave,

I testified for the Telecommunications Industry Association at this 
hearing,
and I made this point directly.  CALEA has an enforcement provision that
allows the FBI to sue any carrier for noncompliance.  But the FBI has to
show that the noncompliance actually prevented a wiretap, and a carrier 
can
defend by showing that compliance wasn't reasonably achievable or the 
FBI
could have gotten the information some other way.  The FBI has never 
brought
an enforcement action under CALEA, which strongly suggests that it can't
meet the statute's requirements, which in turn ought to make us pretty
skeptical about any claims that heavy new regulation of the kind 
proposed by
the FCC is needed.

The testimony is on line at 
www.steptoe.com/publications/bakertestimony.pdf.

Stewart Baker

-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 6:58 AM
To: ip () v2 listbox com
Subject: [IP] House hearings on CALEA




Begin forwarded message:

From: Sean Donelan <sean () DONELAN COM>
Date: September 9, 2004 11:25:09 PM EDT
To: CYBERTELECOM-L () LISTSERV AOL COM
Subject: House hearings on CALEA
Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet
<CYBERTELECOM-L () LISTSERV AOL COM>

Of course, CALEA is not a wiretap law.  Compliance with a court order 
for a
wiretap is not necessarily related to compliance with CALEA. If there 
is no
technical reason why carriers can not provide wiretaps to law 
enforcement,
what does CALEA change?

The FBI continues to decline to identify a single case where a carrier
refused to comply with a court order. If it has happened, why hasn't the
judge supervising the wiretap order found the provider in contempt of 
court?
Several years ago Earthlink challanged on order, but the
judge
ordered Earthlink to comply, and it did.

Is raising the spector the same as saying it happened?  Or is it just
imagination?


House subcommittee told carriers can comply with CALEA
by HEATHER FORSGREN WEAVER
Sept. 09, 2004 12:43 PM EST

WASHINGTON.There is no technical reason for carriers not to comply with 
the
digital wiretap act, a senior government official said Wednesday. [...]
"Unfortunately, when it comes to telecommunications technology, many
terrorists are not as primitive as their evil and demented worldview. In
fact, law enforcement raises the specter of terrorists exploiting 
perceived
technological gaps with respect to certain services for which
telecommunications carriers are unable to provide, or are unable to 
provide
in useable form, the content of communications or related information as
required by court order," said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of 
the
House telecommunications subcommittee.

http://rcrnews.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=19536

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as SBaker () steptoe com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: 
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/