[c-nsp] CALEA was Re: OT - Dark Fiber

[Scott McGrath]

Been there done that - bet detective was not amused when informed said timezone did not exist.    The alphabet soup guys often come calling at our shop.



-----Original Message-----

From:  "jp" <jp at saucer.midcoast.com>
Subj:  Re: [c-nsp] CALEA was Re:  OT - Dark Fiber
Date:  Fri Sep 4, 2009 16:55
Size:  2K
To:  "Scott Granados" <gsgranados at comcast.net>
cc:  "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>

I've never had to capture traffic for the LEAs, but we do ocassionally  
get legit subpoenas to determine who was using what IP address at a  
particular time. We don't get to know much about the subpoenas, but I'd  
suspect it's a mix of child porn, drunk chatters making death threats  
online in public forums, etc...  I wouldn't be suprised if we someday  
had to capture traffic for an LEA, so I keep it in mind. I know for  
certain some of these are from customers with wide open wifi routers. 
 
I think it's mostly a scam to make us do more paperwork and for vendors  
to sell more equipment or upgrades. The vendors were big on this.  
Encryption is the source of your civil liberty here. 
 
The upside is that LEAs are probably supposed to be somewhat more 
knowledgeable at asking for information in their subpoenas as a result  
of the existence of a process. Ten years ago, I was talking with a  
detective in charge of a subpoena I'd been served. I asked him what  
time zone, and he said Green Mountain Time. I am not joking. 
 
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 01:07:36PM -0700, Scott Granados wrote: 
> Why does anyone comply with CALEA?  Especially after the abuses of the last  
> 8 years and probably a lot farther back than that?  I've been reading about  
> the requirements and the idea that ISPs cooperate with law enforcement  
> really makes me uneasy on a civil liberties basis. Does Uncle Sam scare  
> tactic people in to compliance?  There's just something about making things  
> easier for the NSA and any number of alphabet soup agencies that strikes me  
> as unamerican (to use their own phrase against them) and wrong. Or was it  
> created simply to create a new space for security products and C, J and the  
> others were really good at lobbying? 
>    Since it doesn't require the ISP to break open encrypted traffic it  
> almost makes me think a public key system that lets the end user encrypt  
> everything from phone to television with their own keys makes some sense so  
> there's nothing left in the clear f