07, 2011 5:59 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea Compliance
You would be better off putting a passive tap inline and the router as a
probe. If you do that, it will be completely invisible to the end customer.
Regards,
Jeff
ImageStream Sales Manager
800-813-5123 x106
] On
Behalf Of Roger Howard
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 10:50 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea Compliance
Ok, but the FBI wouldn't know I stuck the hardware there at the last
minute. And the tower glitches off whenever I do a firmware upgrade
anyway. The customer wouldn't know
The FBI told me (and I am paraphrasing) that if you work with them that they
will work with you. Basically as long as you are not acting like you do not
think they have a right to do the tap and are not being a pain in the behind
then you will get all the support you need from them in a lawful
On 03/06/2011 09:18 AM, John Scrivner wrote:
The FBI told me (and I am paraphrasing) that if you work with them
that they will work with you. Basically as long as you are not acting
like you do not think they have a right to do the tap and are not
being a pain in the behind then you will
The easy answer is if you get a warrant you should ask the agency for
help before doing anything. They are more than willing to help in my
experience. My advice is:
1.Get your attorney involved to the point they know what you are doing
2.Call the agency who the warrant is for and ask for
Would I cover myself for calea by having a mikrotik router on the
shelf, set up as a bridge, with the calea module installed. Then if I
get subpoenaed for a tap, I just run out to the appropriate tower and
put it on the ethernet interface of whichever AP the subscriber is on?
Thanks,
Roger
Depends who you ask. Some might say the customer could notice a change in
network and hence non compliant.
On Mar 5, 2011 10:43 PM, Roger Howard g5inter...@gmail.com wrote:
Would I cover myself for calea by having a mikrotik router on the
shelf, set up as a bridge, with the calea module
Ok, but the FBI wouldn't know I stuck the hardware there at the last
minute. And the tower glitches off whenever I do a firmware upgrade
anyway. The customer wouldn't know the difference.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Josh Luthman
j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote:
Depends who you ask. Some
Hi all-
I'm just curious if anyone has a contact for someone that is
a CALEA compliance contractor.
Essentially we are looking for a third party that can verify
compliance.
Hit me offlist, please.
Regards,
-chris
)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Christopher Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:42 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Calea compliance
- Original Message -
From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
Tim Kery wrote:
Hi Ross,
SNIP
You also have to remember that Law Enforcement's primary focus is Law
: Todd Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:19 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
John,
The part that is causing disbelief for me is the deadline is only
days away
and I haven't seen this solution or the costing for the solution
- Original Message -
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
I went to email him, but his website says he will not respond to emails from
outside his district.
his website
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Todd Barber wrote:
I have seen numerous posts on the WISPA list indicating that a cost
effective and compliant solution for this issue was being worked on
and would become available in the near future.
All I can say is please be patient. An answer to your question is
John Scrivner wrote:
We look forward to proving that this thinking is wrong. What part of
CALEA compliance is it that makes you think we cannot develop a low
cost and reasonable solution which will not break the bank?
Even if you do come up with a way to handle LI in time for the deadline
] CALEA Compliance
John Scrivner wrote:
We look forward to proving that this thinking is wrong. What part of
CALEA compliance is it that makes you think we cannot develop a low cost
and reasonable solution which will not break the bank?
Even if you do come up with a way to handle LI in time
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
Ross Cornett wrote:
I still would like to know the amount of incident that this CALEA will
cause for all of its costs to our industry. Did anyone ask the FBI, why
they cannot have several machines and deliver them as needed
pre-configured then we can
:59 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
If we can come up with a device to capture and send to an FTP server and
allow for VPN connectivity then why can the most powerful law agency in
the world not do the same. This way they controll it all. We just
provide the pipe to get the data back
Ross Cornett wrote:
I still would like to know the amount of incident that this CALEA will
cause for all of its costs to our industry. Did anyone ask the FBI,
why they cannot have several machines and deliver them as needed
pre-configured then we can install them when they are needed. It is
You need to filter out data that is not under the subpoena.
And (as I understand it) the LEA should work with you to get the data.
Ross Cornett wrote:
If we can come up with a device to capture and send to an FTP server
and allow for VPN connectivity then why can the most powerful law
agency
.
- Original Message -
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
I still would like to know the amount of incident that this CALEA will
cause
for all of its costs to our industry. Did
Council on Education vs. FCC.
Hope this helps.
Tim Kery
BearHill Security, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 09:40:06 -0500
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED
I have seen numerous posts on the WISPA list indicating that a cost
effective and compliant solution for this issue was being worked on and
would become available in the near future.
I think that is wishful thinking on some people's part. When you see
companies like Cisco struggle to provide a
I'd like to add my own brief CALEA comments and concerns. Out of respect
for the maximum of 5 posts per day proposal, I'll keep it short.
I'm thinking that extending CALEA to small WISPs without compensating
them for their costs has more to do with the big fish eating the little
fish than it
I personally do not believe that any CALEA can be cost effective. Quite
simply, solving CALEA requires spending money without earning any
additional revenue. The only way to justify the CALEA expense is to accept
it as a cost of doing business. This means simply that your market
opportunity is
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:14 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
I personally do not believe that any CALEA can be cost effective. Quite
simply, solving CALEA requires spending money without earning any
additional revenue. The only way
of those out there that can't/won't figure it
out for themselves. Might as well be you!
marlon
- Original Message -
From: Todd Barber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:19 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
John,
The part
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Compliance
I personally do not believe that any CALEA can be cost effective. Quite
simply, solving CALEA requires spending money without earning any
additional revenue
I've posted a lot on CALEA here, and some of you are likely tired of
hearing from me, if you haven't already filtered :)
Just a general point from reading:
Some of you are going to / have already gone with TTPs. Just be
careful. Having read some of their posts over in the AskCALEA forums,
On another subject
Two months ago, we were ready to join WISPA. At the time, I felt that
WISPA had proven its longevity and was becoming a mature voice for the
WISP's. But, after the form 477 issue, FCC sticker issue, and now
the CALEA issue, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with the
- Original Message -
From: Clint Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods- For Clint
Ralph,
My apologies for the confusion.
I think we are more or less on the same page
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:09:23 -0700, Marlon K. Schafer wrote
Mark, your info is 3 years old
We have to be ready to tap our lines. Even IMs.
marlon
I think you missed my point, Marlon... That being that not even the
government is a reliable source of information about what the
Mark,
wispa wrote:
I have been attempting for how long now, to get across to you people that
this whole CALEA flap for ISP's is NOT LAW, but opinion from the FCC, where
it's attempting to write law instead of Congress.
It's a mess, because it's NOT LAW, only Congress can write law and it
Mark,
CALEA IS LAW. There are interpretations of that law, but they have been upheld
by courts.
CALEA is not the opinion of the DOJ or FCC. It is not far-reaching (like say the Patriot Act) or secret and possibly illegal like the NSA-ATT wiretapping / surveillance.
It is part of the 2
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:31:56 -0400, Dawn DiPietro wrote
Mark,
wispa wrote:
I have been attempting for how long now, to get across to you people that
this whole CALEA flap for ISP's is NOT LAW, but opinion from the FCC,
where
it's attempting to write law instead of Congress.
It's
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:21:53 -0400, Peter R. wrote
Mark,
CALEA IS LAW. There are interpretations of that law, but they have
been upheld by courts.
YOu're arguing against things I'm not saying.
CALEA is not the opinion of the DOJ or FCC. It is not far-reaching
(like say the Patriot
] CALEA compliance methods
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:21:53 -0400, Peter R. wrote
Mark,
CALEA IS LAW. There are interpretations of that law, but they have
been upheld by courts.
YOu're arguing against things I'm not saying.
CALEA is not the opinion of the DOJ or FCC. It is not far-reaching
- Original Message - From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:21:53 -0400, Peter R. wrote
Mark,
CALEA IS LAW
Mark,
Wireless providers DO have to comply with CALEA whether you like it or not.
As quoted from the link I sent you earlier;
Nor does our interpretation of section 332 of the Communications Act
and its implementing regulations here alter either our decision in the
CALEA proceeding to apply
The best stratergy to take towards CALEA is to get familiar and get
ready to comply. If for some reason it turns out some don't have to
comply, then no loss. If it turns out that we all have to comply, then
we're ahead of the game.
Think positive!
Dawn DiPietro wrote:
Mark,
Wireless
discussed in my original post, from a
technical standpoint.
Thanks,
Adam
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:17:09 -0400, Dawn DiPietro wrote
Mark,
Wireless providers DO have to comply with CALEA whether you like it
or not.
As quoted from the link I sent you earlier;
Nor does our interpretation of section 332 of the Communications
Act and its implementing regulations
http://forum.mikrotik.com/search.php?mode=resultssid=723d81c229563812d900d2
0b3a31a900
Ralph
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
should
follow the original intent of the Constitution...but that cat left the bag
decades ago.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of wispa
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:29:18 -0400, Jeff Broadwick wrote
Mark,
Right or wrong, Congress regularly delegates rule-making to the various
agencies. They pass laws that are purposely vague and/or broad and they
empower the various agencies (and the courts, ultimately) to fill in
the blanks.
=resultssid=723d81c229563812d900d2
0b3a31a900
Ralph
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Hi,
While I appreciate Mark's comments
Mark,
Enough with the analogies.
CALEA is law - not once but twice - 1934 and 1996.
Courts have upheld the FCC decision on what CALEA covers.
The same laws that give the DOJ the right to wiretap, gives the FCC the
right to create guidelines.
I don't like it, any more than I like ATT letting
@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router. Likewise,
although assistance from manufacturors is nice, it is not requisite
Clint Ricker wrote:
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router.
Wouldn't it be cool, and cheap, if it was just that easy?
Here's your encrypted access to xxx customers radio / port, it's yours
to monitor...?
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router. Likewise,
although assistance from manufacturors is nice, it is not requisite
and in some ways may
There are 3rd party vendors, like IP Fabrics with CALEA compliance gear.
For data it shouldn't be that big of a deal since the Edge Router
(connecting your WAN with your upstream) should be able to be tapped, if
you use what I will call a brand name (Cisco, Juniper, Redback, blah,
blah and
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods- For Clint
Hello Clint.
You are confusing me. When I mention MT, I said routers, not CPE. We
don't
use non type accepted CPE and therefore don't have
Blair,
Two months ago, we were ready to join WISPA. At the time, I felt that
WISPA had proven its longevity and was becoming a mature voice for the
WISP's. But, after the form 477 issue, FCC sticker issue, and now
the CALEA issue, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with the majority of
the
Blair Davis wrote:
Because at WISPA, we don't have to all think the same and have the same
opinions all in step. We're not clones. We're individuals who each have
our own beliefs and run our operation individually, sometimes uniquely
And fortunately WISPA is an organization made up of
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:20:15 -0400, Blair Davis wrote
I've been watching this discussion for a bit.
Up front, I have to say I agree with Mark.
Say the FBI and DOJ wanted a way to track any automobile in the
country in real time, (so the bad guys can't hide their movements).
They go to
George
As to form 477 and CALEA, no, no one has spoken of making membership
contingent on their position on these issues.
But, I do recall a discussion, on this list, 'Dealing with bad players',
starting on Feb 8, that basically proposed requiring the use of
stickered equipment to be a
Sounds vagely familiar,
Like I said, from my opinion, wispa would not be an industry association
Remember once had a guy selling jock straps with the wispa logo thinking
that was a good idea too.
Blair Davis wrote:
George
As to form 477 and CALEA, no, no one has spoken of making
Inline
wispa wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:20:15 -0400, Blair Davis wrote
I've been watching this discussion for a bit.
Up front, I have to say I agree with Mark.
Say the FBI and DOJ wanted a way to track any automobile in the
country in real time, (so the bad guys can't hide
Mark,
Right in time.
WISPA will be having elections in the very near future.
Now is the time to join WISPA and be eligible to cast your vote or run
for a board seat.
Membership is a very low 250.00 per year.
And you get to vote!
Try the new automated sign up:
We're close guys. Just waiting to get a doc fine tuned and double checked.
marlon
- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
I bet
, here?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Clint Ricker
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:09:23 -0700, Marlon K. Schafer wrote
Mark, your info is 3 years old
We have to be ready to tap our lines. Even IMs.
marlon
I think you missed my point, Marlon... That being that not even the
government is a reliable source
linked to from the Mikrotik
threads:
http://contributions.atis.org/UPLOAD/PTSC/LAES/PTSC-LAES-2006-084R8.doc ...
Adam
- Original Message -
From: Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
Hi,
As a new member of WISPA I am reading with interest all of the postings
about CALEA from the past few weeks.
Thankfully, we have designed our network in such a way that all customer IP
traffic passes through at least one Cisco switch before it can be bridged to
any other customer or
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:49:43 -0400, Adam Greene wrote
Hi,
As a new member of WISPA I am reading with interest all of the
postings about CALEA from the past few weeks.
Thankfully, we have designed our network in such a way that all
customer IP traffic passes through at least one Cisco
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:49:43 -0400, Adam Greene wrote
extracting a snippet from Adam's interesting prose
A: No. The petition proposes CALEA coverage of only broadband Internet access
service and broadband telephony service. Other Internet-based services,
including those classified as
Mark, your info is 3 years old
We have to be ready to tap our lines. Even IMs.
marlon
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Mon, 26 Mar
67 matches
Mail list logo
