At 9:52 AM -0400 2002/08/15, Daniel Golding wrote:
> Well, what's a "peering point"? Most traffic does not traverse public
> peering points, domestically. So, in order to look at enough traffic to make
> it worthwhile, the .gov would have to optically tap all the private peering
> x-connects between major carriers.
Nope. Just have them do the work for them. If they want to be
more covert, they can just sniff the massive amounts of EMI that is
radiated for miles around any major facility.
> There are also numerous rules against doing this sort of thing domestically.
Google for "ECHELON" and read the lengthy report that was
prepared for the EU. They don't do this domestically -- they ask the
GCHQ to do it for them via the ECHELON network, and then pass them
the data. They return the favour when the GCHQ wants data on some
person in the UK.
> Sniffing peering traffic internationally would actually be much easier, for
> both legal and technical reasons. Linx is the largest public exchange in the
> world, by traffic, for example. However, I doubt that equipment to sniff
> 17gb/sec of data actually exists at the moment.
You have no concept of the kind of systems that the NSA uses.
First off, they use massive numbers of rather less powerful
machines with a "watchlist". Each machine sniffs it's small part of
the overall network, and anything matching the watchlist gets saved
and sent up for further processing, collation, data reduction, etc....
Then things start to get interesting. ;-)
--
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w---
O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
