Tag wiretapping

Entries 3 Total

More Proposals for Wiretapping the Internet

Oct 19, ’10 10:48 AM

Last month I pointed out an article in the NY Times that described a government plan to allow surveillance of communications on the Internet. Basically, the government wants to be able to wiretap things like Facebook, Gmail, Hushmail, and Skype. However, to do this requires adding backdoors to encryption algorithms, and backdoors are just another attack surface that can be used by anyone to break encryption. This may all seem like déjà vu to anyone who was involved in the Clipper chip debates in the 1990s.

This month the story continues as government officials attempt to determine the best way to get access to Internet communications:

The Obama administration is circulating several ideas for legislation that would increase the government’s leverage over carriers, officials familiar with the deliberations say.

One proposal is to increase the likelihood that a firm pays a financial penalty over wiretapping lapses — like imposing retroactive fines after problems are fixed, or billing companies for the cost of government technicians that were brought in to help.

Another proposal would create an incentive for companies to show new systems to the F.B.I. before deployment. Under the plan, an agreement with the bureau certifying that the system is acceptable would be an alternative “safe harbor,” ensuring the firm could not be fined.

These proposals fail to recognize the radically different structure of Internet communications. Even something as simple as video chatting with someone on Skype could involve three or four networks, not to mention the Skype software itself, which is partially owned by eBay. Furthermore, there are numerous open source encryption and communications programs available that could be used by any serious bad actors to avoid any sort of surveillance.

Comments (0)

Wiretapping the Internet

Sep 27, ’10 5:24 PM

The discussion on how to handle surveillance of communications on the Internet is going to get much bigger the closer we get to ECPA reform. Some of the proposals discussed are dangerous and damaging. Consider the following:

To counter such problems, officials are coalescing around several of the proposal’s likely requirements:

  • Communications services that encrypt messages must have a way to unscramble them.
  • Foreign-based providers that do business inside the United States must install a domestic office capable of performing intercepts.
  • Developers of software that enables peer-to-peer communication must redesign their service to allow interception.

These requirements would be ineffective at catching bad actors who could simply use other communications services, and they would also impose onerous costs on companies attempting to comply.

Perhaps it is time to recognize that communicating over the Internet is fundamentally different than communication over more traditional telecommunications networks, such as the telephone network. “Wiretapping” just isn’t as technically feasible in this new environment as it was in the past.

Comments (2)

Warrantless Wiretapping is Illegal

Apr 4, ’10 4:26 PM

A federal court recently ruled that the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping was illegal. Essentially, the Bush administration created a policy where the NSA could wiretap phone calls without a warrant if the call was international and one party was believed to be a terrorist. Of course, records of these wiretaps were kept secret. Here’s Techdirt:

This created a ridiculous Catch-22 situation. As long as the government hid its illegal activities and never said who it spied on, it could spy on anyone illegally. No one could bring a lawsuit, since there was no proof that they had been impacted by the illegal spying.

This was called the Terrorist Surveillance Program, and despite what some liberals wish to believe it has been staunchly supported by the Obama administration. Here’s S.F. Weekly:

Just as significant as the ruling, however, may be what the case demonstrates about the Obama Justice Department’s approach to surveillance of suspected terrorists. Eisenberg told SF Weekly that government lawyers working for Obama had been “more strident” than those working for Bush, refusing to let him see important federal documents related to the case even after he was approved for a top-secret security clearance.

The NY Times notes that Obama said wiretaps of this nature were “unconstitutional and illegal” when he was running for office. Then again, he also voted in favor of granting the telecommunications companies that performed the wiretapping immunity. McCain said he would continue the Bush administration’s policies. It’s a sad day when both major political parties in the United States are in favor of illegally wiretapping citizens. Refuse to be terrorized!

Comments (0)