Posted by
chrisd
on from the law-and-technology dept.
cf_33073 writes "Scary stuff for the privacy advocates out there. Your Internet telephone conversations may soon be tapped by the government. Anyone else concerned about these intercepts being hacked?
Full text of the
RFC
Is available (mirror)"
does this mean that I'll have to start purchasing technology from other countries to keep my own government from snooping on me?
Long time coming
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
CALEA (http://www.fcc.gov/calea/) is something that has been in the works for quite some time. Interesting reading if you are a privacy person. Oh, the days of Fiderus.....
Concerned? Not in my case
by
djupedal
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm more concerned over the rash of unauthorized charges on one of my credit cards over the last two weeks...
I'm seeing an unabated string of charges that appear to be 'internet phone' related. $30 here....$50 there.
I had one c'card number discontinued last Dec., over a string of eBay charges I didn't make, and now this. Anything that can help control this kind of abuse is ok by me...at least for now.
Re:Concerned? Not in my case
by
fredistheking
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I had a similar problem with several $9.95 charges appearing on my bill from various national ISPs every month. I am about 95% certain that my number was abused by some random pricewatch vendor. Anyway, upon calling earthlink to cancel the service that I never signed up for, the person on the otherside of the phone line informed me, "I'm sorry I can't cancel your service, your name is not in our database." After alot of trouble and having to refuse to give them my SSN I was able to cancel the service.
Anway, back to my point. I found a solution to this problem, American Express have a service called Private Payments that allows you to get disposable numbers that only work once. Since I have been using this service I haven't had problems with my number being stolen. Also, since American Express allows you to dispute charges without paying for them unless you loose the dispute, I never had to pay any of the $9.95 charges.
Back on topic, as IP telephony becomes more widely used, encryption is going to be a neccessity. When people buy things and give credit card numbers over the Internet conversation, encryption will be the only protection against crackers intercepting the conversation and stealing numbers. When was the last time you ordered anything from a site that wasn't using SSL?
--
Re:Concerned? Not in my case
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Ben Franklin had something like 30 illegitimate children truly making him one of our founding fathers. He might have been more amused than truly pissed off. On the other hand, he also put chastity as number 12 on a list of 13 things required for Moral Perfection in Poor Richard's Almanac, so maybe he would have been pissed off over using stolen CC numbers to buy porn.
Franklin was one very bright and very complex man. I'm sure that no one alive today knows if he'd have been pissed off or not.
Thank god for September 11 2001
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Don't kid yourself, if September 11 2001 didn't happen, then the current government would have no collective trauma to exploit and introduce all these restrictions of freedom and a total violation of privacy. Only in Nazi, Communist countries do laws say, "well if you got nothing to hide then we can walse into your house uninvited".
Ever since September 11 2001, the hawks and zionists have been laughing in these joyous times. We've seen a complete restriction in our own freedoms, yet they preach to have brought freedom and liberation to Iraq although the place is in total anarchy. Who takes out the garbage, makes the trains run on time, runs the police, fire service, runs the hospitals? Currently nobody and it will be this way for a while.
In case you're wondering if Syria _is next, it is, and then it's the Palestinians and last of all the Osama Bin Laden. This should all have occured in time for the next election, sometime next year. This was expressed in a letter to the president on September 20 2001 by 25 hawks and zionists that have hijacked the whitehouse.
Letter to President Bush
Of course the saddest thing about this letter is that the people who are supposed to be protecting the american people and going after the perpetrators of September 11 seized it as an opportunity to fulfill their personal agendas. This is indeed a slap in the face to the victims and their families and to humanity.
Re:Encryption .. wont be legal much longer.
by
Scaba
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Then it will be made outright illegal, as its placed back on the 'controlled munitions' list.
Re:this isn't an rfc
by
adri
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
If the IP world standardises on interception technologies then we'll have some idea of how to thwart it.
Bring it on. I know you're doing it anyway. Bring it on, let people see what you're doing, let privacy advocates explain to the general public that yes, major internet equipment supports sniffing their traffic, look here for the standard and bewm! Maybe you'll get some sympathy.
I've tried explaining to lay people (non-technical friends) what can be done with todays technology and they look at me dumbfounded. Track your position by your cell phone? Huge databases to analyse the spending patterns of people? What about communication interception? Heck, I've shown a few friends pictures of the golf balls in the UK and they still refused to accept it. sigh!
Re:Encryption
by
colenski
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Read your Cryptonomicon. Sometimes, knowing that a conversation took place can yield information as well.
You aren't worried about tapping? Read on
by
jsse
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This is a true story.
My friend make a long distance call to me and at some point he jokingly said he'll "boom my ass". Just that. A moment later he excused himself and got the door only to be greeted by Government agents.
This sounds like a sick/. joke and I could never imagine it'd really happen. My friend was questioned and released but he was very pissed, questioning their ground of tapping, and his civil right. He even thought of file a racial discrimination suit(he's an American Chinese) but I suggested against his decision in view of present situation in US.
We aren't terrorists, scientists, secret agents or anything associated with them, and we've nothing to hide; but you really can't say it's not annoying to be tapped, like that.
... knowing that a conversation took place can yield information as well.
So? run and use an anoymizer. Works the same way for TCP/IP connections, no? If you don't know your host number the packets can't find the host. If your host does not know your IP, the reply can't find it's way back. No need for the data to be voice over IP.
In the imortal works of Khan, "Let them eat static."
-- DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Re:Unpopular, I know...
by
Geekenstein
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
No, actually the Constitution does not give the judicial branch of government the power of review.
From the Court's website (supremecourtus.gov):
"While the function of judicial review is not explicitly provided in the Constitution, it had been anticipated before the adoption of that document. Prior to 1789, state courts had already overturned legislative acts which conflicted with state constitutions. Moreover, many of the Founding Fathers expected the Supreme Court to assume this role in regard to the Constitution; Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, for example, had underlined the importance of judicial review in the Federalist Papers, which urged adoption of the Constitution."
John Marshall, the first Chief Justice established the precedent of judicial review, and it has since become custom as strong as written law. The court's purpose has always been to interpret and explain the laws of the country, but if they put the kibash on something as unconstitutional, it becomes by decree unenforceable under the law(the court being the embodiment of law in the country).
I've spoken with some upper-level engineers at Vonage. They sell more of Cisco's ATA 186's than ANYONE else. Because of this, they dictate a lot of the hardware and software design/changes in the product to Cisco. You'd be surprised how responsive their upper-level techs are. They are definitely looking for new ideas and ways to improve their service.
More specifically, the tech said that the current hardware in the ATA's is insufficient for doing hardware encryption and that they are looking at a new modification on the ATA CPU to enable just the features you're looking for.
Just wait a bit - they finally got the 911 working, and I expect to see a lot of new things from this company.
Re:Welcome to intercept PGPfone
by
ronaldcromwell
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Is Crypto getting secure to the point that we don't have to worry about anyone decrypting our communications? As open-source solutions become more and more viable, will networks like Freenet set the standard in the future for those of us who actually give a rip about privacy? Are we doomed, or is there a light at the end of the tunnel?
Interestingly enough...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
didn't Cisco sell China some equipment that allowed for some 'monitoring' already?
People will vote with their dollars...I wouldn't worry about it too terribly much. Behold, the glory of capitalism.
Now seriously...pop a prozac and move along. Not much to see here, as with most/. postings.
Seems to me that VOIP transmissions could be pretty easily encrypted, just like E-mail can be with PGP. In fact, it's easier to encrypt digital traffic than it is any analog device (think POTS phones).
--
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Encryption
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm going anonymous coward on this one:p
Don't ask how I know, but I have SEEN (with my own eyes) products by this company http://www.verintsystems.com cut though encryption up to 256bit like butter in near real-time. 128 made it pause for about ½ a second while 256 took around 1-2 seconds.
Verint are also the people who make the black boxes that in real time scan every phone call for key words and if your saying naughty stuff record it for the Intelligence service. When I say black boxes, I mean black boxes, they have no markings and just sit in the bottom of racks in telcos. I know for a fact that every call (fixed, cellular and satellite) in the US, UK and Israel is passed through these systems.
You can encrypt all you want, it doesn't make any difference.
This is *GOOD* for Privacy concerns.
by
RobertNotBob
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
As a geek in the telecom world I have seen the large difference in regulations when it comes to intercepting data vs. voice communications. Here in the USA, judges have known since the creation of our country that speach needs to be protected. However since the dawn of the digital age, the extent to which that protection extends to data has been passionately debated.
I would be very pleased to see legislation that clearly identifies data communication as identical to verbal communication. After reading the document, I think that this (or something close to it) may be exactly what is needed to put a legitimate legal framework around this topic. The more we can make the technical process of LI (lawfull intercept... you did RTA right?) more like the technical process of wire tapping, the easier it will be to approximate the two in the minds of the people who make, judge and execute the law.
-- ___ I don't respond to Anonymous Cowards, and I Never Mod them UP.
Slashdot Mirror
does this mean that I'll have to start purchasing technology from other countries to keep my own government from snooping on me?
CALEA (http://www.fcc.gov/calea/) is something that has been in the works for quite some time. Interesting reading if you are a privacy person. Oh, the days of Fiderus.....
I'm more concerned over the rash of unauthorized charges on one of my credit cards over the last two weeks...
I'm seeing an unabated string of charges that appear to be 'internet phone' related. $30 here....$50 there.
I had one c'card number discontinued last Dec., over a string of eBay charges I didn't make, and now this. Anything that can help control this kind of abuse is ok by me...at least for now.
Don't kid yourself, if September 11 2001 didn't happen, then the current government would have no collective trauma to exploit and introduce all these restrictions of freedom and a total violation of privacy. Only in Nazi, Communist countries do laws say, "well if you got nothing to hide then we can walse into your house uninvited".
Ever since September 11 2001, the hawks and zionists have been laughing in these joyous times. We've seen a complete restriction in our own freedoms, yet they preach to have brought freedom and liberation to Iraq although the place is in total anarchy. Who takes out the garbage, makes the trains run on time, runs the police, fire service, runs the hospitals? Currently nobody and it will be this way for a while.
In case you're wondering if Syria _is next, it is, and then it's the Palestinians and last of all the Osama Bin Laden. This should all have occured in time for the next election, sometime next year. This was expressed in a letter to the president on September 20 2001 by 25 hawks and zionists that have hijacked the whitehouse.
Letter to President Bush
Of course the saddest thing about this letter is that the people who are supposed to be protecting the american people and going after the perpetrators of September 11 seized it as an opportunity to fulfill their personal agendas. This is indeed a slap in the face to the victims and their families and to humanity.
Ray Kurzweil also thinks so .
If the IP world standardises on interception technologies then we'll have some idea of how to thwart it.
Bring it on. I know you're doing it anyway. Bring it on, let people see what you're doing, let privacy advocates explain to the general public that yes, major internet equipment supports sniffing their traffic, look here for the standard and bewm! Maybe you'll get some sympathy.
I've tried explaining to lay people (non-technical friends) what can be done with todays technology and they look at me dumbfounded. Track your position by your cell phone? Huge databases to analyse the spending patterns of people? What about communication interception? Heck, I've shown a few friends pictures of the golf balls in the UK and they still refused to accept it. sigh!
Read your Cryptonomicon. Sometimes, knowing that a conversation took place can yield information as well.
This is a true story.
/. joke and I could never imagine it'd really happen. My friend was questioned and released but he was very pissed, questioning their ground of tapping, and his civil right. He even thought of file a racial discrimination suit(he's an American Chinese) but I suggested against his decision in view of present situation in US.
My friend make a long distance call to me and at some point he jokingly said he'll "boom my ass". Just that. A moment later he excused himself and got the door only to be greeted by Government agents.
This sounds like a sick
We aren't terrorists, scientists, secret agents or anything associated with them, and we've nothing to hide; but you really can't say it's not annoying to be tapped, like that.
So? run and use an anoymizer. Works the same way for TCP/IP connections, no? If you don't know your host number the packets can't find the host. If your host does not know your IP, the reply can't find it's way back. No need for the data to be voice over IP.
In the imortal works of Khan, "Let them eat static."
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
No, actually the Constitution does not give the judicial branch of government the power of review.
:)
From the Court's website (supremecourtus.gov):
"While the function of judicial review is not explicitly provided in the Constitution, it
had been anticipated before the adoption of that document. Prior to 1789, state courts had
already overturned legislative acts which conflicted with state constitutions. Moreover,
many of the Founding Fathers expected the Supreme Court to assume this role in regard
to the Constitution; Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, for example, had underlined
the importance of judicial review in the Federalist Papers, which urged adoption of the
Constitution."
John Marshall, the first Chief Justice established the precedent of judicial review, and it has since become custom as strong as written law. The court's purpose has always been to interpret and explain the laws of the country, but if they put the kibash on something as unconstitutional, it becomes by decree unenforceable under the law(the court being the embodiment of law in the country).
Class dismissed.
I've spoken with some upper-level engineers at Vonage. They sell more of Cisco's ATA 186's than ANYONE else. Because of this, they dictate a lot of the hardware and software design/changes in the product to Cisco. You'd be surprised how responsive their upper-level techs are. They are definitely looking for new ideas and ways to improve their service.
More specifically, the tech said that the current hardware in the ATA's is insufficient for doing hardware encryption and that they are looking at a new modification on the ATA CPU to enable just the features you're looking for.
Just wait a bit - they finally got the 911 working, and I expect to see a lot of new things from this company.
Is Crypto getting secure to the point that we don't have to worry about anyone decrypting our communications? As open-source solutions become more and more viable, will networks like Freenet set the standard in the future for those of us who actually give a rip about privacy? Are we doomed, or is there a light at the end of the tunnel?
didn't Cisco sell China some equipment that allowed for some 'monitoring' already?
/. postings.
People will vote with their dollars...I wouldn't worry about it too terribly much. Behold, the glory of capitalism.
Now seriously...pop a prozac and move along. Not much to see here, as with most
Seems to me that VOIP transmissions could be pretty easily encrypted, just like E-mail can be with PGP. In fact, it's easier to encrypt digital traffic than it is any analog device (think POTS phones).
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
I'm going anonymous coward on this one :p
Don't ask how I know, but I have SEEN (with my own eyes) products by this company http://www.verintsystems.com cut though encryption up to 256bit like butter in near real-time. 128 made it pause for about ½ a second while 256 took around 1-2 seconds.
Verint are also the people who make the black boxes that in real time scan every phone call for key words and if your saying naughty stuff record it for the Intelligence service. When I say black boxes, I mean black boxes, they have no markings and just sit in the bottom of racks in telcos. I know for a fact that every call (fixed, cellular and satellite) in the US, UK and Israel is passed through these systems.
You can encrypt all you want, it doesn't make any difference.
I would be very pleased to see legislation that clearly identifies data communication as identical to verbal communication. After reading the document, I think that this (or something close to it) may be exactly what is needed to put a legitimate legal framework around this topic. The more we can make the technical process of LI (lawfull intercept... you did RTA right?) more like the technical process of wire tapping, the easier it will be to approximate the two in the minds of the people who make, judge and execute the law.
___ I don't respond to Anonymous Cowards, and I Never Mod them UP.