-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Rodger, William wrote:
> Meyer wrote:
> >
> > I guess this explains the FBI's opposition to the Verio
> > merger. I wonder
> > if a colocation company or service provider could be forced
> > to disclose
> > its participation in the Carnivore project.
>
> Not unless compelled by the government.
Even if a prior court order was issued, mandating that they not
disclose their cooporation with the FBI?
> > There's been speculation about NSA black boxes in such facilities for
> > years. The FBI, however, isn't quite as "above the law" as
> > the NSA likes
> > to think it is. What would the legality of operation a random email
> > sniffer be?
>
> It wouldn't be. The FBI needs to show a judge that email is at least
> relevant to an investigation and, in most cases, there is probable cause to
> believe a crime has been commited -- random emails don't fit that
> description.
The argument I foresee is that the Carnivore box is configured to discard
all email and other traffic that does not apply to the
investigation.
However, who audits the configuration of these boxes? This is the question
of who watches the watchers...
> Then again, when email is more than six months old, the law says a judge
> "shall" issue a court order for stored emails when subpoenaed by the
> government. Many observers consider such language a rubber stamp.
Sure sounds like one to me.
- -MW-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD)
Comment: No comment.
iQEVAwUBOW1XtCsFU3q6vVI9AQH7Kwf9ESv+Q59lRPV25a0SzbcIBvCvjRiKtNJN
XzLm9+G1aHxSFxlcexkFTplqV6tsrsATSFGUhpUFZNp7UFTTBiHPT7+ys0/M4+pw
mmkWD1xa0hYMqU0+1RIVfu9Tif/7SuOjGA4IwfAoF8UbJ7AJR/z49sdRQ6tyzRX4
DYXxx826dIKQSW30TBWf7RNC8Be0qELm9u1KO7BCL2fH485met+j/HbBK/hximPU
EJO30jL5R4u688FkqX9ukhwsK2x+97Swh4nepHULJ8da0pkE9c9ZA2XYQyPA2VtW
9xjF02WokA486miMy0Kx7iGntVymg4nu1bF1jrvweqlZqTxjGNxU8Q==
=eeeG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
