IP: Put Carnivore on a proper diet, cryptogrpahers say

[David Farber <dfarber@fast.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Warren" <jwarren@well.com>


> >http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,37728,00.html
> >
> >Giving Carnivore a Proper Diet
> >by Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com)
> >
> >3:00 a.m. Jul. 22, 2000 PDT
> >WASHINGTON -- A pair of prominent cryptographers has some
> >advice for the FBI: Make the Carnivore surveillance system open-source.
> >
> >AT&T Research's Steve Bellovin and Matt Blaze write in a short
> >essay that revealing the innards of the spyware is the only way to
> >make sure Carnivore isn't snacking on more information than it should.
> <...>
>
> It is certainly possible that the FBI et al are resisting disclosure
> of their source code *because* it may disclose all of the "OTHER
> LAWFUL AUTHORIZATION(s)" for covert electronic surveillance of
> American citizen in the USA.
>
> It is crucial to remember that the CALEA (Communications Assistance
> for Law Enforcement Act, HR 4922, enacted by the Democratic majority
> in 1994) requires that -- quoting from the statute -- every public
> and private wired and wireless, "telecommunications [common] carrier
> shall ensure that its equipment, facilities, or services ... are
> capable of - (1) expeditiously isolating and enabling the government,
> pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, to intercept
> ... all wire and electronic communications S concurrently with their
> transmission ...; delivering intercepted communications and
> call-identifying information to the government ... such that they may
> be transmitted by [government equipment] to a location other than the
> premises of the carrier."
>
> In other words, perform the wiretap in a phone company switching
> center, under remote control, and automatically transmit it to some
> other location for the comfort and convenience of the snooper scooper.
>
> The FBI tauts that it only does wiretaps under court order.
>
> But WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE *OTHER* "LAWFUL AUTHORIZATIONs"?!
>
>
> Incidentally, the bill defines "government" as, "the government of
> the United States and ANY agency or instrumentality thereof, the
> District of Columbia, S AND any State or political subdivision
> thereof authorized by law to conduct electronic surveillance."
>
> In other words, ever podunk constable, omnipotent sheriff,
> politicized district attorney and ill-controlled cop stalking a girl
> friend or ex-spouse, all have this same access -- such as the coven
> of Los Angeles Police who were discovered not long ago, routinely
> conducting wiretaps WITHOUT *any* court order.
>
> --jim, Jim Warren; jwarren@well.com
> Contributing Editor & technology public-policy columnist, MicroTimes
Magazine
> Also GovAccess list-owner/editor; 345 Swett Rd, Woodside CA 94062
>    voice/650-851-7075; fax-disconnected-"for"-spam
>
> [self-inflating puff: Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award, Playboy
Foundation;
> Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (in its first year);
> James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award, Soc.of
Prof.Journalists-Nor.Calif
> founded InfoWorld; the Computers, Freedom & Privacy Conferences; blah
> blah blah]
>
>
>
> By the way, the CALEA had substantial penalties for any phone company
> that failed to grant this Orwellian access to remote control access
> to all their customers' phone conversations.  However, it had nary a
> word of penalty for law enforcers caught violating the law!