Sam,
The evidence that LEAs collect is just part of a case. If a suspect is
doing bad things then data will be collected. Next steps would usually
involve a warrant to get the computer and have it looked over. I have
seen other tools used by LEAs to gather evidence. I am guessing that
data-taps will rarely be the basis for an entire case. If it is then
defense attorneys better call on us because I can tell them how easy it
is to make data traffic appear to come from one person or another
without the person's knowledge. That is Hacker 101 type stuff. People
sneaking access on open APs is obviously going to lead to some false
data tap information in many cases. Maybe people will start locking down
their home APs after that happens a few times.
Scriv
Sam Tetherow wrote:
This is one of the things that has always bothered me when it comes to
wire tapping a data connection. On a phone call it can be pretty easy
to tell if your suspect is involved in the conversation, assuming they
have not used a voice modulator. But when it comes to a data
connection, how do you know?
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Martha Huizenga wrote:
This is not the sense that I get from the meeting we had with the
FBI. They will know who the target is and be issuing an order for
that person. However, if they happen to live with several people all
on one wireless network, then the traffic is going to be mixed most
likely. The best you can do is give them the traffic at that IP.
According to the FBI, it's just like when they tap phones. The are to
listen to only the target conversations and not the other people in
the home.
Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
Do they issue search warrants for a whole apartment building because
they suspect "someone" living there is doing something bad? It was my
understanding that a bit more info is required and it has to actually
have a person or persons in mind. Why would data taps be treated any
differently?
Lonnie
On 5/10/07, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little
concerned about
> question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using
an open
> access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
> point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem
that if
> the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the
subpoena
> this would be a violation.
In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC. There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it. From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP. If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.
I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need. Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.
Just my opinion.
Matt
--
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/
