Re: FCC Issues Rule Allowing FBI to Dictate Wiretap-Friendly Design for In ternet Services

[Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>]

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Tony Li wrote:
> I'm sorry, but this is simply an unsupportable statement.  What is
> required of routers is that the provider be able to configure the device
> to make copies of certain packets to a monitoring port.  Assuming that
> the monitoring port is duly managed, how does this qualify as "insecure"?

Unfortunately, things are never as simple as they appear.  The department
of justice/fbi/dea/etc wish lists have been published/leaked with a
suitable google search.  Port mirroring may not be considered sufficient.

I think the EFF is missing the important part of the wish list items.  The
wish list items aren't for wiretaps, but defining as many things as
possible as "non-content."  Its important for network operators because
they will end up doing a lot more work digging through packets for
non-content information, and important for lawyers because it lessens the
legal requirements for non-content information.  What is the "expectation
of privacy" of non-content information?