SPRINT HELPING FBI WIRETAP JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. . .

[kpete]

Point, Click ... Eavesdrop: How the FBI Wiretap Net Operates
By Ryan Singel 08.29.07

SPRINT HELPING FBI WIRETAP JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. . . INCLUDING YOUR TIVO SELECTIONS

RYAN SINGEL, WIRED - The FBI has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-click surveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost any communications device, according to nearly a thousand pages of restricted documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act. The surveillance system, called DCSNet, for Digital Collection System Network, connects FBI wiretapping rooms to switches controlled by traditional land-line operators, internet-telephony providers and cellular companies. It is far more intricately woven into the nation's telecom infrastructure than observers suspected.

It's a "comprehensive wiretap system that intercepts wire-line phones, cellular phones, SMS and push-to-talk systems," says Steven Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor and longtime surveillance expert. Slideshow

.........................

Together, the surveillance systems let FBI agents play back recordings even as they are being captured (like TiVo), create master wiretap files, send digital recordings to translators, track the rough location of targets in real time using cell-tower information, and even stream intercepts outward to mobile surveillance vans.

FBI wiretapping rooms in field offices and undercover locations around the country are connected through a private, encrypted backbone that is separated from the internet. Sprint runs it on the government's behalf.

.................

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/08/wiretap

[northzax]

1. this is a stupid headline

where does it say anything about accessing your TiVO? it says it can record in real time, like your TiVO not off your TiVO.

is this a surpise? you should basically assume that any and all communications that are not done face to face are interceptable. it's been this way for a while. If the government wants to access your cell phone, or your computer (if it is connected to the net) it can. if you really want to keep things secret, encrypt them, but assume that, unless you wrote the encryption software, they can break that, too.

the problem is not that the government has the technical capability to listen in, what is important is the controls put on the system to ensure it isn't abused.

[kpete]

2. thanks

I think you are right

[snooper2]

5. Actually, technically the government does not...

Some companies like AT&T may be giving them un-restricted access to information, which is highly illegal. Most all companies are not going to provide access to an outside agency "a free for all". There are processes in place to recieve the signed warrant from a judge, only then either provide the level of information requested in the warrant. Some warrants are only looking for call records, I.E. terminating and originating numbers, call duration, etc,. It takes another level of warrant to actually intercept the call and provide the "conversation". The government doesn't have access to go in to a DMS-100 and start changing the translations to point it an intercept device. Most comapanies still don't have the recources in place to even intercept VoIP calls (capture the RTP and Media streams), even though the CALEA law is now in effect....

Oh, agree, stupid headline...

[northzax]

6. my point is, the important part is not the technical capability

(trust me, if the NSA wants to listen to your VOIP calls, they can) but the mechanisms put in place to ensure that the capability (by the companies or the government, or anyone else) is not abused. think of it this way. My landlord has a key to my apartment (obviously) what's important is not that he has the key, but that there is a system in place that I can reasonably expect him not to use that key unless there is a very good reason, agreed upon in advance.

[snooper2]

7. Actually, NSA can't listen to all VoIP calls...

One company in particular can't build the required probes fast enough...I can't say much more...

I agree about the key to the apartment concept though...I had a drink last night with someone from the company I work for who is 1 of 2 people who has clearance to perform the network configurations and recieve a "lawfull intercept" warrant. (Clearance so he doesn't let the person know their phone, data are being tapped :) )

[northzax]

8. sure, maybe not all

but that is, as you say, a hardware shortage, not a technical issue. the total data collection apparatus may not be complete (or it may be) but as a general rule, can we agree that once the Government identifies you, in particular, as someone they are interested in, only manpower provents them from access to your entire electronic life?

[snooper2]

9. I would say manpower...

and a willingness from the communications provider to break the law...

[northzax]

10. and the willingness to not break the law

is the check on the system, not the technology. this was, I think, both of our points before we started parsing semantics :)!

[saigon68]

3. Sprint employs lots of assholes and fools

Especially those imitation english speakers from Bangladesh and New Delhi who try to sell me their crappy long distance plans at dinner time.

[0rganism]

4. Well, wouldn't you expect such technology to exist?

This is not a surprise, really. In fact I would be dismayed if the FBI didn't have this capability. The problem that arises is that these taps need to be inescapably documented in a legally accessible manner, so that courts have a record of what was tapped when and the corresponding warrants and waivers. Ideally, the software used by the agents would require such data verified at the enabling stage in order to open the recording channel. Without such safeguards, such a system becomes prone to serious misuse.