We use a DLINK hotspot router that emails me every connect and disconnect
from our hotels. The FBI could take that log and compare it to room number
and date of stay and they can find their man that way... FYI>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Question
There will likely be cases where that's impossible.
Lets say that I have a customer that's a hotel. They, at first, only know
the ip addy or mac addy. A subpoena comes to me looking for info on the
user in question. There's no way to use the hotel's Linksys hardware to
do the tap to find the specific think that LEA is looking for. Can't
change the network because any action on our side tips off the suspect.
In some cases it won't be possible to filter out all info. Especially if
we don't know what we're looking for (which we won't and shouldn't) as far
as specific data goes.
I talked to the head of the FBI's CALEA group for about an hour again
yesterday. They know full well that there are just some things that can't
be done. At the end of the day, the just need our help when and where we
can give it to them. There are far too many possibilities to deal with
every single possible situation, we know that, they know that.
As long as we make a real effort to help I don't think we have to worry
about getting in trouble. It's those that thumb their noses that will run
enforcement risks.
I was told that there has NEVER been an enforcement issue occur.
laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services
42846865 (icq) WISP Operator since
1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Question
Marlon,
I was under the impression the providers are only supposed to send the
LEA the data covered in the subpoena and no more.
Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
Read the FAQ. In some cases they may have to sort through ALL data to
get at what they want.
marlon
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom DeReggi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Question
In my opinion, I don;t think it will fly because of "NAT".
The law inforcement agrency needs to be able to differenciate what
customer traffic is comming from, and if you use NAT for any of your
customers, the facilities based upstream provider would have no way to
identify the end user, and the WISP would become the customer and be
liable. To many degrees of seperation at the upstream for the captured
data to be meaningful.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Question
The FCC wrote:
we conclude that establishments that
acquire broadband Internet access service from a facilities-based
provider to enable their patrons or customers to access the Internet
from their respective establishments are not considered
facilities-based
broadband Internet access service providers
Hm.
It'd be one heckuva stretch, but by reading the letter (as opposed to
the spirit) of that paragraph, many smaller WISPs would automatically
be exempt. I know my office has "acquired broadband Internet access
service from a facilities-based provider" (our upstream ISP) and we're
enabling our customers to access the Internet from their respective
establishments (i.e. our customers pay for Internet at their homes or
offices).
By the letter of that paragraph (and, to be fair, I haven't read all
the context surrounding it) most any single-homed WISP would be
exempt, as they could just say "go talk to our upstream." (I doubt
it'd work for multi-homed ISPs, as that would require multiple
upstreams to be tapped and somehow synchronized, which is probably
technically annoying.)
David Smith
MVN.net
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/