Slashdot Mirror


Law Enforcement Targets Online Communication

jesup writes "The FCC ruled yesterday that the CALEA applies both to broadband suppliers and to all calls made via VoIP providers. If they have any connection to the PSTN, it applies whether the call in question is IP-to-IP or not. Separately, all broadband suppliers will have to implement CALEA, which means providing access to law enforcement for trap-and-trace on all traffic on broadband connections. In related news, the FCC has also released a policy document that states that 'consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement.' In theory, under this they could require wiretaps on in-game chat, or key-logging in file encryption programs."

35 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. your rights by BarkLouder · · Score: 3, Funny

    All your right are belong to us!

    1. Re:your rights by Grax · · Score: 5, Funny

      The secret police are there to protect you from the "bad people". We should all support their efforts.

    2. Re:your rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously people, get over it. CALEA has been law for well over a decade (1994, to be exact). This is not something new. CALEA does not give the feds power to do wiretaps, either. That power was explicitly defined in 1968. It was defined in order to PREVENT law enforcement from snooping on people. Prior to that, there was no law about it, and cops could eavesdrop and tap phones as much as they felt like. The law in 1968 defined their power to tap communications, but also put strenuous restrictions on how they could go about doing it. Now, they have to jump through a bunch of hoops, apply for a court order, and hope they can convince the judge that this breach of personal privacy is truly necessary.

      CALEA simply means that communications providers must bear the cost of installing equipment to help law enforcement do these wiretaps. The FCC ruling, as it relates to CALEA and VoIP, only means that VoIP companies must provide similar equipment to the feds as the telcos have been providing for many years.

      Now, as to the rest about broadband service providers... The FCC can go ahead and enact this rulemaking all it wants. However, they do not have the power to do this. CALEA specifically exempts information service providers, under which definition fall all ISPs. This part at least will be thrown out in court if it is ever challenged. As to VoIP, they also fall under the definition of information service provider, but at least the FCC has a small leg to stand on when trying to force them under CALEA, as there is a section (in this case, a conflicting section) of CALEA which refers to "substantial replacement" of traditional telcos. This part could also be thrown out, depending on arguments before the court, and who is more persuasive.

      However, the pending legislation linked earlier on Slashdot (last week; not looking it up) would impact these issues in CALEA, and bring VoIP and broadband, etc., under CALEA type regulation, depending on whether or not it gets passed in its current nascient form. However, once again, this would not be GRANTING this power to law enforcement. It's been around for a long, long time.

      Also, with respect to a couple posts I saw below about EU people looking down on these major invasions of US privacy, don't fool yourselves. Most EU countries are lightyears ahead of the US in their pervasive monitoring and regulation of all internet services.

    3. Re:your rights by jesup · · Score: 3, Informative

      Original poster here.

      You're correct that CALEA doesn't *authorize* wiretaps - but it does require that providers make calls easily tappable (when they might otherwise be slow, hard or impossible to tap).

      And as it applies to VoIP providers, it requires they set things up to allow tapping calls that previously weren't covered (IP-to-IP calls), if the service offers _any_ sort of connection to the PSTN, even through a 3rd party.

      TFA has all the footnotes justifying this expansion of powers... Basically if the data goes through a switch or router on a public network, they're covered.

  2. welcome to by mobilebuddha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the people's republic of united states.

    1. Re:welcome to by heavy+snowfall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Scary that by trying to avoid communism your country ends up with exactly the features of it that you don't want. You (not you but your people) refuse useful stuff like national healthcare and free college tuition, but are more than happy to give up your right to privacy in the name of the war on (terror|drugs|dancing|barney).

      --
      Use your bluetooth phone as a modem for Linux

  3. Right... by pete6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This will be about as easy to implement as a ban on internet porn, which is to say impossible. Sure they can get the major providers to comply, but good luck tracking down every chat room operator.

    1. Re:Right... by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure they can get the major providers to comply, but good luck tracking down every chat room operator.

      Yes sir! We will comply with your "family first" and "anti-terrorism" chat room rools even though they violate our First Amendment rights! Tb shpx lbhefrys lbh snfpvfg cvtf! Oh sorry, my fingers were on the wrong keys. Yes, "USA! USA! USA! Down with terrorists and porno!"

      Jura gur shpx ner jr tbvat gb fgnaq hc gb gur snfpvfg shpxref naq svanyyl gryy gurz gb trg shpxrq? Sorry, the keys are slippery.

    2. Re:Right... by Virak · · Score: 3, Funny

      Geez, you should at least use something secure, like 2ROT13.

    3. Re:Right... by interiot · · Score: 3, Informative
      Due to the special properties of ROT13, the number of rounds must be even, otherwise the algorithm provides only as much security as simple ROT13. Good implementations would be e.g. 2ROT13, 4ROT13, 6ROT13 or 2048ROT13.

      Currently, an implementation of 2ROT13 exists, which is called Pretty Good Double ROT13 Privacy - or short PG2ROT13P - and is meant to be a successor to the infamous Pretty Good Privacy cryptography toolkit.

      Long-term goals are also to make the EU parliament and US congress pass laws that require all personal letters, postcards and even face-to-face conversations to be encrypted with 2ROT13.

      Brilliant!
    4. Re:Right... by g2devi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dam straight.

      And you're not alone.

      The following organizations have proudly joined the fight for freedom:
                  MAtrOx, microsoST, ALexa, INTerpol, Avanti, LIBerAty alliNnce, HUeS aircraft, Sara lEe, INgsoc

      Who else will join The Fight?

  4. Gahrewjhrjkhare by Brandon+K · · Score: 5, Insightful

    which means providing access to law enforcement for trap-and-trace on all traffic on broadband connections.

    Goddamnit, I swear, the last few decades in America have been more like an Orwell book than the books themselves.

    I'm moving up to Canada, the worst they have there is stray polar bears. Who's coming with me?

    1. Re:Gahrewjhrjkhare by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm moving up to Canada, the worst they have there is stray polar bears. Umm, what about celin dion ?

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
  5. Reasons to go black market IT by dada21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have no problem providing stronger encryption communications to my customers. I've helped implement encrypted VoIP before VoIP was a defined term. Some of the shadier "organizations" already employ an incredible amount of geeks -- $100,000 a year cash (for a 20 hour a week job) is hard to say no to.

    These laws are a waste of money. A VoIP stream can easily be hidden in a Quake3 online stream played between bots. There's too much information changing hands.

    And who the hell are they trying to catch? Drug dealers? Terrorists? Enforcement of either set of laws only creates more people filling in the shoes of those caught.

    We're not making a dent in any non-violent crime, why throw more money at a non-problem?

    1. Re:Reasons to go black market IT by Concern · · Score: 4, Insightful

      why throw more money at a non-problem?

      I know your question is partly rhetorical. But it's such a good one, I'll answer.

      Social control.

      The people in power today are anxious to return to the J Edgar Hoover days of federal "law" "enforcement," when federal agents could be employed as a goon squad for servicing the needs of the dominant political and economic interests backing the government.

      To make this good, they need eliminate oversight (such as judicial review), and expand their powers (limiting civil and human rights). As far as I can see, this has basically been the sole law enforcement agenda of both Bush and Clinton - the only difference was the intensity with which they pursued it.

      --
      Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
    2. Re:Reasons to go black market IT by retendo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree. If you really want to hide your communications, just roll your own communications programs and/or roll your own encryption. Although you might not create the strongest encryption scheme for the "law enforcement" folks to spy on you they have to federally funded script kiddies. I'm sure they have scripts to crack main stream encryptions. If you were one of "them" wouldn't you just go after the low hanging fruit first?

      It's kinda like the car alarm theory, your alarm doesn't have to prevent the vehicle from being stolen, it just has to make it sufficiently difficult so the thief doesn't want to bother.

      At least for now.....

    3. Re:Reasons to go black market IT by arkanes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In fairness, this has pretty much been the goal and intent of law enforcement pretty much forever. In fact, the idea that laws (and the enforcement thereof) are in any way for the benefit of the citizenry is a pretty recent concept, historically speaking.

  6. Freedom of speech, as long as the cops OK it by Grax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I assume this means we continue to have the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech, as long as it is OK with law enforcement. (hmmm)

  7. Military Misuse by Valacosa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So legally, we're forced to leave our lines of communication open for law enforcement.

    Who watches the watchers?

    IM programs aren't that hard to write, if someone really wants to avoid John Law they could just write a proprietary program with a proprietary encryption protocol. Is that technically illegal?

    Every time I read a story like this, I am reminded of that video on the 'net somewhere (too lazy to look for it) of military personnel using military equipment to watch a couple make out in a car.

    --
    "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
    1. Re:Military Misuse by Concern · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm pretty sure you're talking about this.

      "06 - 26"
      "This is 06."
      "Uh, we've got activity out here but I don't think we really need to report it"
      "What do you see?"
      "Ah, appears to be fornication in a converitble"
      (laughter)
      "Do a target score, and I'll be there in a second"
      (laughter)
      "Ah, we're taping it." ...

      "White Hawk 26 - Alpha 1 1 Uniform"
      "Ah, this is 26"
      "Roger, I'm gonna need that tape from you, and an additional..."
      "Roger, we'll make copies for everyone."


      Our tax dollars hard at work.

      --
      Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
  8. Not necessarily applicable to non-telecom uses by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Informative
    From TFA:

    A House of Representatives committee report prepared in October 1994 emphatically says CALEA's requirements "do not apply to information services such as electronic-mail services; or online services such as CompuServe, Prodigy, America Online or Mead Data (Central); or to Internet service providers."

    So it sounds like this will only apply to VOIP, not to email, chat-rooms, and so on, as the /. summary states.

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
    1. Re:Not necessarily applicable to non-telecom uses by jesup · · Score: 4, Informative
      (Original poster here...)

      However, if you read the 59-page PDF of the CALEA ruling, you'll see CALEA applies to broadband operators in general. You're correct that it doesn't apply to email services - so hotmail doesn't have to deal with CALEA, but your ISP does.

      Also, they state on page 20 that CALEA doesn't apply to the storage of email at your ISP. This is true. However, they state CALEA does apply to the "switching and transmission" component of the ISP's service. So they can't ask for a copy of your stored email - but they CAN ask to tap all the traffic to and from your PC.

  9. I just wonder one thing... by Daneurysm · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Will the coup be bloody?

    1. Re:I just wonder one thing... by paranode · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not until they take away the football channels.

  10. In Soviet Russia... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Funny

    People have more privacy than YOU!

    <NELSON>HAH HAH!</NELSON>

  11. Needs of Law Enforcement by N7DR · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So: consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement.

    Which, translated into English, means: "if you want to use service X, but Law Enforcement can't tap service X, then you no longer are entitled to use X". For "X" substitute whatever service you like. Wonderful.

  12. What about DIY PBXs? by ectospasm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What if some [terrorist, child porn, etc.] group decided to set up a network of Asterisk or Bayonne servers, virtually circumventing any established VoIP providers? I'm not sure about Bayonne, but Asterisk is extremely easy to throw together and set up. Will they make setting up such "unlicensed" servers illegal? I shudder to think what that would do to the community at large...

    --


    We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of the dreams.
  13. Imagine the possibilities by evil+agent · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine someone playing a multiplayer fps with a screen name like George Bush or something. Every time he gets killed, the feds would have to investigate!

    --
    End transmission.
  14. This is damned creepy by JayBlalock · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Did anyone read the actual policy document? The arrogance in it is just stunning. It has a list of things the consumer is "entitled" to do, every one with a legality-related caveat.

    The FCC appears to truly believe that they have been granted power to regulate Internet usage as they see fit.

    It's not just the wording, it's the mentality. Everything about the document suggests that the FCC is the source from which the right to use the Internet flows. AND that the *consumer* is ultimately responsible for anything "illegal" that is on his computer. Even if it's just a matter of unknowningly using a VoIP protocol that doesn't allow tapping.

    There's no other way to read it, and furthermore, it's the only "logical" (in terms of the logic of empire) way of dealing with the situation. Since they can never regulate the internet COMPANIES - who will all swiftly relocate to another country - they will have to regulate the PEOPLE to make sure their laws are followed. And they have to do that since, of course, laws passed must be enforced.

    This is, as they say, doubleplus ungood.

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  15. "They have made their decision... by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "They have made their decision, now let them enforce it" is honestly the first thing that comes to mind.

    Or in other words, how the hell does the FCC even have the power to enact this rule? The FCC of course has the ability to set standards for telephones; if someone wishes to patch a computer program into the "normal" phone network, then of course it's reasonable that those calls follow the same regulations as any other phone provider. But what they're talking about now sounds way, way outside the scope of anything the FCC was ever empowered or intended to regulate. It reminds me of when the FCC demanded copy control chips be put into every TV and video card, until some months later, just before the deadline for the regulations to begin, the courts, in response to inquiry by the EFF, pointed out that, no, the FCC doesn't have the right or power to demand such things.

    Has anyone spoken to the EFF or ACLU about possibly challenging this new ruling in court?

  16. Attack on Privacy by MrSteveSD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ask yourself why the government has never tried to open everyones letters, photocopy them and then reseal and post them?

    It's not because they wouldn't like to, it's just too much hassle to do it. Even if they did try to do it, the public would be outraged, yet far less noise is being made just because the medium is electronic rather than paper. Computers make it possible to snoop on people cheaply and that is the problem. As technology progresses, more and more snooping abilities will become economical.

    They would like you to believe that this is to thwart terrorists, but terrorists will of course use the strongest encryption and will not play by the rules. I believe the general public are the real target here. If you suspect a certain person is a terrorist, there are already many ways you can put them under surveillance. You can install keyloggers on their computer, bug them, bounce lasers of windows etc etc. If you don't know who the terrorists are you have to perform mass surveillance of eveyones mail looking for keywords. The problem is that terrorists won't say "Meet me by the Bank of America with the Semtex" they will say something like "See you at the pub on Wednesday. Bring that new playstation game.".

    Recent freedom of information releases in the UK (my country) have shown that the police have in the past infiltrated groups such as the anti-apartheid movement and other legitimate and non-threatening political groups. That's the sort of behaviour I expect in Uzbekistan not the UK. We must also not forget Echlon , which has been used to spy on European businesses. Our governments have shown that they cannot be trusted time and time again. We must not allow them to use the fear of terrorism to rob us of our rights and privacy.

    Anyway. I have a counter proposal. We now know that politicians are making important decisions in face to face meetings so that there are no electronic records. I propose that all politicians be required to wear head mounted video cameras that record everything they say and do. The tapes must be handed in and stored in the event of any enquiry. We can explain that we have to do this because of the terrible threat of CORRUPTION. Anyone in the government could be involved in CORRUPTION and innocent politicians will have nothing to fear in these new measures. We have to balance the need for government secrecy with the important fight against CORRUPTION. We cannot allow CORRUPTION to win.

  17. Re:Umm.... TFH? by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There have been innocent people put on the No-Fly list too, and they had a heck of a time getting off. It is very possible to be innocent and imprisioned. Because there is supposed to be some right to privacy. Being constantly watched is a form of harrassment. That to me is the real point. It used to be that a man's home was his castle, and now it's becoming clear that Orwell was not paranoid enough.

  18. Guess what - Vonage already complies by Zebra_X · · Score: 4, Informative

    Something I wrote a few months ago:

    A few weeks ago while on vacation I bought a Linksys wrtp54g router from Radio Shack. It is touted as a two line VoIP router that is compatible with vonage. It seemed like what I needed at the time, a g capable wireless router that wouldn't crash like my old netgear.

    I set it up - and it's been running quite well for a month now. I noticed though, that I could SSH to it. What was curious was the fact that i couldn't login. I used the "administrative" login, but it didn't work. I also tried the other default passwords - with no luck. This made me wonder who infact had the password and could login to the router. I wasn't too worried about it. Until today.

    I've been trying to get inbound PPTP VPN working, and it hangs at "Verfiying Username and Password..." only to return error 721. Indeed it would seem that inbound GRE forwarding doesn't work. So I thought to myself, I'll just get a firmware update and everything will be happy. The question was "Where is the firmware?". It's not on linksys's site. I come to find that Vonage controls the firmware for this router. I've also found that it's not easy to get through proper channels. Also, it seems to not flash when the router is not in a "provisioned" state.

    This is where things get really interesting. It would seem that Vonage has complete control over the router. There are a number of default passwords that can be accessed, but not changed through the various interfaces. It would also seem that there is a bit of "phoning home" going on. Some of the firmware versions have automatic update installed allowing them to download the latest version via TFTP.

    Now that's an interesting topic. From my reading, the updates are not encrypted nor are they transmitted over a secure connection. There seems to be no verification of the contents of the firmware file. Let's go out on a limb for a moment and say that the update server is compromised and a compromised update is placed on the server. The update is then automatically, with no verification or intervention, downloaded and installed on all of the vonage routers that have been provisioned.

    The result: *PWND*. Every last router.

    This is terrible. Not only is it terrible, there is absolutely nothing on the box, or in the literature that says that this router is programatically connected to Vonage. There is absolutely no warning that there is even a *chance* that Vonage, could for example install various utilities or wares on your router at their discretion.

    This device should not be sold in stores. It should be shipped by Vonage to end customers who agree and ackknowledge that they are giving up control of what goes in and out of their network.

    Now it's time to do something about it.

  19. Corporate Interests Meddling in OSS by Bananas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has it occured to anyone here that over time, more and more OSS is going to become "borderline illegal"? That we may end up with VLC as a program that you can't import into the USA (because of its DVD capabilities); that Asterix will move out of the states (because it provides private communication without a corporate entity, and will eventually be "regulated" in such a way that only telcos could use it); that even simple tools like GNU shred will "disappear"? B.S. like the E911 service are merely thinly vieled threats against existing VoIP providers, by way of legislation from the dominate telcos to ensure that VoIP doesn't take off...without them leading the way, of course.

    I'm beginning to think that I should hoard source code like never before...

    Suddenly, that 15-CD debian distro looks better and better, provided the source code is provided.

    RMS may sound like a crackpot to our facist overlords^W^Wcorporate lobby, but he's right on the money - if the source code to a program can be controlled (by hardware, software, or firmware, no difference) then you really don't have any freedom as to what you can do. And that kind of freedom scares some people, but not for the reasons that are presented in the nightly news; you have to remember, never in human history have you had a world-wide connected information network that spanned cultures, beliefs, and challenged the status quo in every case. What we are seeing is the slow relentless progress of those entities - governments, transnational corporations, and hyper-wealthy private interests - to "dumb down" or take away from that potential. If people woke up one day and realized that they didn't have to work for someone else to provide for themselves, well, they jig would be up and the few in privledge would find themselves fighting to maintain control, as they always have through the ages. This isn't about political spectrums such as right vs left, democracy vs communism; this is about power, and the maintenance of power. Money, which years ago used to actually have a value of some sort, has degenerated into just another form of power. In this case, CALEA is power applied for both the telcos (who suddenly are felling the heat from VoIP) and government interests (in this case, the existing regime^W administration wants to extend its powerbase).

    (Yawn) enough ranting for today, go outside and play...

  20. Cockroach Response by Phoenix666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sorry, but I just can't think of a better term. Everytime this sort of Big Brother article comes along, one of the two major memes that pops up is, "gee, the wording of the law/policy/whitepaper/directive says this, but it doesn't say that, so by simply reworking the protocol stack or implementing this kind of encryption stored in SeaLand we can perform a simple end-run around it." It's basically, right-wing neo-fascist does this, so I'm going to do that in an attempt to run, hide, and sneak around them. And I'm sorry, but this sort of attitude is a molly-coddled, namby-pamby Harvey milquetoast response that likely stems from the "I've been bullied/abused/neglected all my life" meme. Basically it's fascists whomp some area of the countertop and everyone runs for cover response.

    In truth, if we're talking about a war for the freedom of information, then Slashdotters collectively are the best possible warriors to prosecute that fight. In the rest of your life, you may have felt powerless--physically intimidated or socially out-classed. But in this realm you are the gods of the age. You must do something.

    There are myriad offline groups out there that are fighting their guts out against this sort of thing. You can help them. They all need I.T. systems that help them organize, raise money, and fight. You can sign up to code a system that will enable them to do so. You can give money from your above-average I.T. salary to support their efforts. Or you can get creative and blow everyone away. You can do so much, which is for you relatively little, and you will make an enormous difference.

    Still not sure what to do or where to channel your energies? Send me a message via Slashdot and I will be happy to give you some leads. For one, I started a grassroots political group in NY that has won several elections but still needs help with its website and volunteer organization system. We could use your help. Drop me a line and let's do something.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.