Security Vs. Privacy

Privacy issues now are taking a back seat to patriotism and security when it comes to gathering intelligence from wireless and wireline phones. On Oct. 11, the House and Senate passed the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 2001. The ATA expands law enforcement's ability to tap the communications of a person, not just a device or specific phone line.

According to a CTIA spokesman, wireless carriers are ready and willing to follow Congress' lead.

“If Congress says do it, we'll do it,” he said.

Existing wiretap authority and procedures, garnered by law-enforcement agencies with Congress' 1994 passage of CALEA, have helped them keep up with advances in wireless and digital technology. By authorizing person-focused surveillance, the ATA's aim is to allow the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies to keep up with criminals and terrorists who are using multiple devices, carriers and technologies/services to hatch and carry out their evil plots.

Because CALEA requires carriers to modify their equipment, facilities and services to ensure that they comply with “authorized electronic surveillance,” it's yet uncertain whether the ATA in its final form will end up costing carriers money.

“So long as the government and Congress tinker with surveillance laws, there's always the prospect that there may be a more definitive change to CALEA, although there hasn't been one so far with this bill,” said a telecom-industry attorney. “Although the administration has repeatedly stated that it doesn't intend for carriers to have to modify their equipment, there may be inadvertent changes where the administration didn't think it would be imposing any new technical burden on carriers.”

Upon ATA's enactment, wireless won't be treated “any differently than landline, and law enforcement will have more authority to tap whatever they want and do it more vigorously,” added Herschel Shosteck, The Shosteck Group president & chairman.

If they do incur any additional costs to meet law enforcers' surveillance needs, wireless carriers will have to absorb them without complaining about it publicly. Any resistance would be seen as unpatriotic, Shosteck added.

Packet Trapping

Eight days after the attacks, the FCC extended to Nov. 19 a Sept. 30 deadline by which wireless carriers were to have implemented packet-mode communications-surveillance capabilities in their networks.

Ironically, passage of the ATA may take the burden of coming up with a packet-mode solution off of the wireless industry's back, according to a handful of industry insiders. That's because it likely will clear the way for law-enforcement agencies to use the FBI's proprietary — and before Sept. 11, controversial — Carnivore packet-mode surveillance technology. The controversy has surrounded Carnivore's ability to examine all of the packet-mode communications an individual makes, not just what's been authorized in less extreme cases.

“Right now, it looks like the most likely technical impact for wireless carriers will be that the ATA makes it clear that Carnivore is a legal device for the government to use,” the telecom attorney added. “And as a result, it will have an option for conducting surveillance on those wireless IP technologies.”

The attorney could not say whether it was likely that the technology would be licensed so that mainstream vendors could manufacture Carnivore equipment.

Passage of the ATA also is likely to clear up any debate about whether information contained in SMS and CDPD communiques are fair game for intelligence gatherers as well, he added.

---

Lindstrom (Annielindstrom@aol.com) is a freelance writer based in Cape Coral, FL.