On 9/28/2010 1:47 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that
enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like
BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software
that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be
technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The
mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble
encrypted messages.
Isn't this just a clarification of existing CALEA practice?
In most jurisdictions, if a communications services provider is served
an order to make available communications, it is required by law to
provide it in the clear. Anything else doesn't make sense, does it?
Service providers generally acknowledge this (including Research In
Motion, so I don't get why they are singled out in the article).
<SNIP>
This post from the IETF Wiretapping list [RAVEN] from October, 1999
may be relevant to the discussion.
Should Tin Cans and String comply with CALEA?
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/raven/current/msg00007.html
The question has special significance to me as proprietor of
tincansandstring.net
--
Josh Rubin
jlru...@tincansandstring.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majord...@metzdowd.com
