The deadline arrived along with observances from privacy advocates, who do not share the FBI’s or DoJ’s enthusiasm for CALEA’s entry into the Internet. Cory Doctorow at Boing Boing commented on the extension of wiretap law into data:

This has been the law for voice switches for over a decade, where it represents a potential holiday for dirty cops who don’t have warrants use these back-doors (and criminals and corporate espionageists who want to eavesdrop on sensitive calls). Now it’s part of our data infrastructure as well. Nice one, America.

Kevin Poulsen at Wired’s Threat Level blog demonstrated a similar lack of enthusiasm about CALEA’s drop-dead date:

It’s worth noting that the new requirements don’t alter the legal standards for law enforcement to win court orders for internet wiretaps. Fans of CALEA expansion argue that it therefore won’t increase the number of Americans under surveillance.

That’s wrong, of course. Making surveillance easier and faster gives law enforcement agencies of all stripes more reason to eschew old-fashioned police work in favor of spying.

In an ideal world, surveillance would be seen as a beneficent entity, watching for events that disrupt societal norms. The world is far from ideal, and while arguments against CALEA may be dismissed in favor of law enforcement concerns, the potential for abuse does exist.

Let’s hope the public’s desire for a safe society isn’t fulfilled by a controlled one where non-mainstream thought is checked into silence through fear.

The Washington Wire blog recently posted about the divide between Alexander and Tate with regards to their viewpoints on college and university compliance with the federal law called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA).

Alexander spoke in February and criticized the FCC’s support of an unfunded mandate by the FCC to force higher education to pay billions to upgrade their computer networks. Those upgrades would enable government and law enforcement to easily monitor calls or Internet traffic.

Tate, who once reported to Alexander, thinks the contentions by colleges and universities have been “highly speculative” where cost is concerned. Though she does not necessarily want to make higher education even more costly for students and families, she still endorsed a May 2007 deadline for compliance.

The FCC has been the subject of other actions over CALEA. And it did not come off well in a recent hearing, where a federal judge scoffed at the FCC attorney arguing in favor of CALEA. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards called attorney Jacob Lewis’ arguments “nonsense” and “gobbledygook” during a hearing.

At issue is a provision in the original CALEA terms as written in 1994. That provision as emphasized by a House committee report excluded email services, online services, or Internet service providers from CALEA, CNet said in a report. The FCC still clings to the viewpoint that “telecommunications provider” also means broadband and VoIP providers.

The debate also has to resolve what parts of a college network must be rendered wiretap-friendly. That could mean the “pipes” connecting a campus to the Internet, or the entire network infrastructure of the campus.

—
Tag:

Add to | DiggThis | Yahoo! My Web | Furl It

Bookmark WebProNews –

David Utter is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business.

Pity Jacob Lewis, attorney for the Federal Communications Commission. A trio of federal Circuit judges proved at best an indifferent audience for arguments by Lewis in favor of revising the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) to account for modern technology.

At worst, Lewis found himself derided by U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards, according to an AP report. “Gobbledygook,” said Edwards. “Nonsense,” he also said of Lewis’ arguments.

“Your argument makes no sense,” Edwards also said, to the delight of those who oppose what they see as invasive rules from an older era of technology being applied to a much newer playing field, especially with the rise of VoIP services like Skype, Vonage, and others.

Federal agencies foretell a dark world of evil benefiting from limited wiretapping laws. The Department of Justice said leaving out VoIP would deliver “a surveillance safe haven for criminals and terrorists who make use of new communications services.”

It will be several months before the judges decide whether or not CALEA should be expanded. In that time perhaps they will consider another aspect of communication that federal agencies would prefer not to have exposed in broader detail to the American public.

Intra- and interagency communication failures have been cited as factors that contributed to the federal government’s inability to thwart the 9/11 attacks. While Alberto Gonzales et al think they need to know more about the communications between everyone else, maybe the assorted law enforcement and intelligence agencies should worry more about effectively communicating with each other instead.

—
Tag:

Add to | DiggThis | Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

David Utter is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business.