Fw: Fahrenheit FBI

[Guest guest]

interesting! NG

-

j

n

Monday, August 09, 2004 9:35 PM

Fahrenheit FBI

 

--

 

Fahrenheit FBI

 

August 9, 2004, 4:00 AM PT

 

By Declan McCullagh

 

A new U.S. government decision extending wiretapping regulations to the Internet

raises far more questions than it answers.

 

The Federal Communications Commission voted 5-0 last week to prohibit businesses

from offering broadband or Internet phone service unless they provide police

with backdoors for wiretapping access. Formal regulations are expected by early

next year.

 

But the commissioners didn't give the FBI and its allies at the Justice

Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration everything they wanted.

 

In the police agencies' original request, submitted in March, they asked the FCC

to force surveillance back doors into instant-messaging programs and voice over

Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications that do not use the traditional telephone

network. The FCC politely declined, with Chairman Michael Powell saying those

services were exempt from the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act

(CALEA) and that it was " unnecessary to identify future services and entities

subject to " mandatory wiretapping requirements.

 

How will you force a company based in Luxembourg to insert backdoors in

its software when it has no obligation to do so?

 

So what happens next? Here are some questions that could be asked of Attorney

General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller:

 

.. Your request to the FCC said that broadband and VoIP companies may raise

prices to " recover their CALEA implementation costs from their customers. " How

do you square higher prices with President Bush's speech in March calling for

" affordable broadband " for all Americans?

 

.. Congress gave telephone companies $500 million to buy new equipment to comply

with CALEA. Why should Internet companies not receive the same treatment? Is it

because Verizon, SBC and the other former Bells have well-connected lobbying

outposts in Washington, D.C.--but Vonage, 8x8 and other VoIP start-ups do not?

 

.. Skype CEO Niklas Zennstrom told me last fall that " we do not have any legal

obligation to provide any means for interception " in his company's VoIP

software. How will you force a company based in Luxembourg to insert backdoors

in its software when it has no obligation to do so?

 

.. Even if Skype redesigned its software to satisfy the FBI, how would you stop

its users from switching to a competitor that offered secure communications

without back doors for police surveillance? Why would criminals, terrorists and

other miscreants choose to use eavesdropping-enabled software if a secure option

was available?

 

.. The FBI rarely gives up when it comes to demanding eavesdropping access. Your

predecessors Louis Freeh and Janet Reno strong-armed Congress into approving

CALEA on Oct. 7, 1994, one day before politicians left town for a fall recess.

Capitol Hill is already considering VoIP regulation--will the FBI now ask

Congress for regulatory power over peer-to-peer VoIP applications and instant

messaging?

 

.. The popular SourceForge.net site lists dozens of free VoIP applications and

programming libraries without FBI back doors. Fortunately for you,

SourceForge.net is run by VA Software of Fremont, Calif., and is under U.S.

jurisdiction. Should VA Software be permitted to continue distributing VoIP

programs that don't guarantee access to the FBI?

 

.. Skype, PGPfone, and the still-incomplete GPGfone intentionally glue

encryption into their VoIP applications to make them untappable. Your

predecessor, Louis Freeh, lobbied Congress to ban strong encryption, and one

House of Representatives committee agreed to his proposal in 1997. Will you pick

up where he left off?

 

.. Conservative groups including Americans for Tax Reform, the Free Congress

Foundation and the Rutherford Institute

 

Given that VoIP and instant-messaging clients aren't widely used yet, why

not try the voluntary approach before talking about banning certain

technologies?

 

warn that granting your requests would " drive up costs, impair and delay

innovation, threaten privacy and force development of the latest Internet

innovations offshore. " These groups share President Bush's commitment to the war

on terror and backed you, John Ashcroft, when your nomination to be attorney

general was foundering in the Senate. When they suggest other ways to accomplish

your stated goal of protecting America, might they be right?

 

.. Two of the FCC's five commissioners expressed reservations about the legality

of extending CALEA to broadband and certain VoIP services. Commissioner Michael

Copps warned: " If these proposals become the rules and reasons we have to defend

in court, we may find ourselves making a stand on very shaky ground. " Do you

think that the FCC has the authority to extend CALEA to the Internet, given that

Congress explicitly rejected that notion a decade ago?

 

.. You've been saying that terrorists may use VoIP services to " evade lawful

electronic surveillance. " But the only detailed court statistics available show

that 77 percent of wiretap applications were for drug crimes, and

terrorism-related offenses were so few they didn't even make the chart. Is

terrorism the real reason behind your wiretap push?

 

.. The best figures available show that only 4 percent of wiretaps were targeted

at computers and electronic devices last year, with the rest aimed at the

traditional phone network. Vonage and other VoIP companies have pledged to work

with you. Given that VoIP and instant-messaging clients aren't widely used yet,

why not try the voluntary approach before talking about banning certain

technologies?

 

.. American technology companies would like to help the FBI with legitimate

investigations done under proper judicial oversight. But CALEA's requirements go

hand in hand with the Patriot Act, which expanded the circumstances under which

police may obtain wiretaps without a judge's prior approval. What assurances can

you provide that the substantial powers you're seeking won't be abused?

 

 

 

biography

Declan McCullagh is CNET News.com's Washington, D.C., correspondent. He

chronicles the busy intersection between technology and politics. Before that,

he worked for several years as Washington bureau chief for Wired News. He has

also worked as a reporter for The Netly News, Time magazine and HotWired.