[IP] House hearings on CALEA
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sean Donelan <sean@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 9, 2004 11:25:09 PM EDT
To: CYBERTELECOM-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: House hearings on CALEA
Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet
<CYBERTELECOM-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Of course, CALEA is not a wiretap law. Compliance with a court order
for a wiretap is not necessarily related to compliance with CALEA.
If there is no technical reason why carriers can not provide wiretaps
to law enforcement, what does CALEA change?
The FBI continues to decline to identify a single case where a carrier
refused to comply with a court order. If it has happened, why hasn't
the judge supervising the wiretap order found the provider in contempt
of court? Several years ago Earthlink challanged on order, but the
judge
ordered Earthlink to comply, and it did.
Is raising the spector the same as saying it happened? Or is it just
imagination?
House subcommittee told carriers can comply with CALEA
by HEATHER FORSGREN WEAVER
Sept. 09, 2004 12:43 PM EST
WASHINGTON.There is no technical reason for carriers not to comply with
the digital wiretap act, a senior government official said Wednesday.
[...]
"Unfortunately, when it comes to telecommunications technology, many
terrorists are not as primitive as their evil and demented worldview. In
fact, law enforcement raises the specter of terrorists exploiting
perceived technological gaps with respect to certain services for which
telecommunications carriers are unable to provide, or are unable to
provide in useable form, the content of communications or related
information as required by court order," said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.),
chairman of the House telecommunications subcommittee.
http://rcrnews.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=19536
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/