Re: [TSCM-L] Re: Feds move to include backdoor in all software and
hardware
11 We note that confusion may arise over the terms "subscriber" and
"subject." At pp. 27-28 of their March 27,
1998 Joint Petition for Expedited Rulemaking, DoJ/FBI define these terms
as follows:
When we refer to "subscriber," we are referring to the person or
entity whose "equipment, facilities, or
services" (47 U.S.C. ยง 1002(a)(1)) are the subject of an
authorized law enforcement surveillance activity.
The subscriber often will be a person or entity suspected of
criminal activity, but in some instances, the
subscriber will simply be someone whose relationship to a
suspected criminal (e.g., spouse or employer)
makes it likely that criminal activity will be transacted or
discussed over the subscriber's facilities. When
we refer to "intercept subject" or "subject," we are referring
to any person who is using the subscriber's
equipment, facilities, or services, and whose conversations (or
dialing activity) therefore would be capable
of being acquired during an interception. In a particular
investigation, the "intercept subjects" could
include the subscriber, who may or may not be involved in
criminal activity; a non-subscriber who is not
involved in criminal activity; or a non-subscriber who is
involved in criminal activity.
----------
Non-commercial solutions are out. Asterisk is out for VoIP providers,
unless "modified to comply" with the rules. Once passed, this
authorizes the FCC to establish the rules and/or technical requirements
with a simple petition, hence the nebulous wording about what
constitutes technical compliance if "...a Government agency or any other
person believes that such requirements or standards are deficient."
Worse, the footnote's language of "authorized law enforcement
surveillance activity" makes no mention of the Constitution, or a proper
search warrant, or due process, or oversight. "Authorized law
enforcement surveillance activity" could mean any number of things in
BushCo Newspeak.
"...'intercept subject' could include the subscriber, who may or may not
be involved in criminal activity; a non-subscriber who is not involved
in criminal activity;..." ?????!!!!!!!
So much for the 4th Amendment.
d..._at_geer.org wrote:
>on second thought:
>
> |
> | The rule isn't yet final, but once it is, all vendors will have 18
> | months to comply. And in fact, says Brad Templeton, chairman of the
> | Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), some router makers already
> | include such a backdoor. So your hardware may be vulnerable.
> |
>
>does this make open-source software routers verbotten?
>
>--dan
>
>
>
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:26 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Sat Mar 02 2024 - 01:11:46 CST