Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - [internetworkers] Internet is wiretapping frontier

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Christian Stalberg" <cpsr_rtp AT internet-lab.com>
  • To: <cpsr-rtp AT cpsr.org>, <surgelocal AT listserv.unc.edu>, <progress AT listserv.unc.edu>, <cpsr-privacy AT cpsr.org>, <Aauw-patriot AT rtpnet.org>, <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: [internetworkers] Internet is wiretapping frontier
  • Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 06:03:39 -0400

Internet is wiretapping frontier
By Michael D. Sorkin
Published: Saturday, Mar. 27 2004

The FBI already can intercept phone lines, e-mails and instant messaging
with
ease.

Now it's fighting for even faster and easier access. The bureau and other
law
enforcement agencies are in a battle with the companies that transmit the
e-mails, phone calls and instant messages.

Police would still need a court order to tap phone or computer lines, and
that
likely won't change.

The current battle is over whether the FBI will dictate the technology to
eavesdrop on Internet communications. Also at stake: whether you will pay
more
to use the Internet.

This month, the FBI unveiled a plan to require all U.S. broadband
providers, including cable and DSL companies, to rewire their Internet
networks
to make it easier for police agencies to intercept messages.

The eavesdropping technology plan is on a fast track.

Within hours of receiving the proposal on March 12, the Federal
Communications
Commission announced that the public had 30 days to send in comments before
the
commission takes up the plan. A vote is expected this summer and final
action
is possible by next year.

Lining up against it are many communications companies and privacy and
technology organizations. They assert that the proposal would greatly expand
the FBI's wiretapping abilities, stifle innovations in Internet technology
and
cost billions of dollars that Internet providers would pass on to consumers.

The FBI responds that its plan is "frequently misunderstood."

The government's ability to stop terrorism "is significantly dependent upon
our
ability to intercept communications," says Greg Motta, an FBI associate
general
counsel.

"At a time when our country is debating - did our intelligence-gathering
agencies fail us in 9-11? - the FBI is saying that if we do not resolve this
problem, we cannot do an adequate job to protect the American people," Motta
warns.

To answer critics, the bureau has set up a Web site (askcalea.com), where it
denies that its plan includes making it easier for police to monitor e-mail.

The critics aren't buying it.

"There's no doubt they are asking for access to e-mail," says Stewart Baker,
an
attorney who has analyzed the FBI's proposal. "This is a very big deal,"
adds
Baker, a former general counsel for the National Security Agency who now
represents broadband companies.

In St. Louis, the largest broadband companies are SBC and Charter
Communications. They say they are still trying to figure out what the FBI's
plan would cost them. The companies say they protect customer privacy but
cooperate with court-ordered wiretapping.

In St. Charles County, Charter offers telephone service through the
Internet -
Charter Telephone Service, starting at $10.95 per month. Charter says those
phone lines already are accessible to court-approved wiretapping by the
government.

For its part, SBC says it has complied with at least one federal court order
to
permit monitoring of e-mail over its DSL network. SBC wouldn't elaborate.

Wiretapping

The Justice Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration back the FBI
plan. And FCC Chairman Michael Powell seems sympathetic.

Wiretapping is not a new practice; the FBI says it simply wants to update
that
tool for today's Internet technology.

"Wiretap evidence historically has been extremely fruitful," says Steve
Higgins, a former U.S. attorney in St. Louis under former President George
Bush. Higgins says that if the FBI's technology plan prevails, "I believe
the
safeguards are in place to guard against undue invasion of authority."

Ed Dowd, U.S. attorney here under President Bill Clinton, says the law
requiring a judge to find "probable cause" protects against unlawful
wiretaps.

The FBI says it isn't proposing any change in legal safeguards.

The FBI, with court approval, already can intercept e-mail and other
broadband
communications such as instant messaging and phone calls via computer.
Indeed,
some technology experts say that since the bureau already can intercept
messages, why require cable and DSL companies to spend huge sums to get
messages that already are gettable?

The bureau says that with current technology, broadband companies can't
always
respond quickly enough to intercept messages. The bureau's plan would
require
that all broadband companies - cable and DSL firms that provide fast
Internet
service - be ready in advance when the government wants to tap a phone on
one
of the growing number of broadband telephone networks such as Charter's in
St.
Charles County.

Not so fast, the critics say: The FBI really wants the industry to spend a
lot
of money so that the bureau can continue intercepting communications in the
same old way it has for years.

"The FBI doesn't want anything to change," says John Morris of the Center
for
Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit civil liberties group in Washington.
"They want anything that happens over the Internet to be made to look like
an
old style phone call, even though it's not an old-style phone call.

Controlling the technology

Morris says the FBI also wants prior approval over any new broadband
communications technology. "And the FBI will only approve things that comply
with the FBI's archaic notion of what interception should be.

"Two things will happen," Morris argues. "Internet innovation in the U.S.
will
simply stop. And what innovation does continue will move overseas."

The FBI insists its plan will have "minimal impact" on future technology.

As to the cost, broadband companies say they shouldn't have to shoulder the
enormous price of the government's wiretapping.

In the past, police paid phone companies relatively little for wiretapping
accessibility. Some companies now want to charge for their full cost to buy
equipment to permit government wiretaps. That rankles the FBI.

The companies say the cost to them - and their customers - would be in the
hundreds of millions of dollars - and possibly billions. The cost includes
filters that would prevent police from intercepting communications from
innocent parties along with those they scoop up from suspects.

"If the government wants it done, the government should pay for it," former
U.S. Attorney Dowd says of the eavesdropping technology proposal.

That's not what the government has in mind.

The FBI's Motta says you will pay whether it's through taxes or Internet
charges: "We get our money from taxes," he says. "It's not like we can get
our
money from anybody other than consumers anyway."

For more information go online to:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

Click the first link and type in the first field: RM-10865.

Other sites:

http://www.fcc.gov/calea/

http://www.cdt.org/digi_tele/

Reporter Michael Sorkin covers consumer and privacy issues.

Reporter Michael D. Sorkin
E-mail: msorkin AT post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-340-8347




  • [internetworkers] Internet is wiretapping frontier, Christian Stalberg, 04/05/2004

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page