LEGISLATION PUTS CARRIERS ON FRONT LINE OF SECURITY

As expected, the House joined the Senate last week in passing anti-terrorism legislation designed to give federal law enforcement agencies broader power to conduct surveillance of suspected terrorists.

The byproduct of the legislation for telecom service providers is a great many more surveillance requests. They also will find it more difficult to avoid compliance with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994.

The bills expand the existing pen-register and trap-and-trace rules to include electronic communications such as e-mail and Internet activity. Wiretap orders — now valid for only one phone number — will be effective for any phone numbers or Internet addresses being used by a suspected terrorist.

“The order would follow a person regardless of the technology they're using,” said Michael Warren, president of Intercept Compliance Solutions, which assists service providers trying to comply with CALEA.

Finally, the bills expand the subpoena authority of federal law enforcement agencies, in effect allowing them to write subpoenas on their own authority. Subpoenas issued in one state also would be valid in all states.

“You're going to see a significant increase in the volume of wiretap orders and subpoenas,” said Warren.

It shouldn't be a problem for carriers, which have responded to such requests for years, said Nancy Kaplan, vice president for industry analyst Adventis. “They're aware of the mood of the country right now,” she said. “There's no sense of ‘[We] don't want to.’ It's more a case of, ‘What do we have to do to make it happen?’”

On a separate security matter, Verizon Communications Vice Chairman and President Larry Babbio asked the FCC to reconsider co-location rules that give employees of competitive carriers unfettered access to ILECs' facilities.

“If you really want to create panic in this country, take down the telecommunications network,” he said, raising the possibility that terrorists could infiltrate facilities nationwide by posing as network technicians.

Babbio said the FCC is considering the request, but a commission spokesman said he was unaware of it and doubted the FCC would grant it. “While Congress may have security concerns, Chairman [Michael] Powell is not interested in curtailing the activity of CLECs regarding their legal rights to co-location and interconnection services,” the spokesman said.

Babbio is letting his emotions get the better of him, said Dick Metzger, vice president of regulatory affairs for CLEC Focal Communications. The real problem is that you don't have to be an employee to gain access to many COs, he said.

But Metzger emphasized that Focal, which is offering its switching facilities on a co-location basis as part of its disaster-recovery program, will work with Verizon should the rules change.

That's a welcome sentiment at a time when the industry should cooperate, said Lauren “Pete” Belvin, vice president of federal policy and regulation for Qwest Communications. “ILECS and CLECs need to get sane,” he said. “These aren't normal times.”