DOCSLIB.ORG

What Can the Nsa Do?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Can the Nsa Do? EAVESDROPPING 101: WHAT CAN THE NSA DO? he recent revelations about illegal that act as gateways” at “some of the main NSA has no prior reason to suspect you, and eavesdropping on American citizens by arteries for moving voice and some Internet you are in no way tied to any other suspicious Tthe U.S. National Security Agency have traffic into and out of the United States.”1 individuals – you have just been plucked out raised many questions about just what the of the crowd by a computer algorithm’s analy- agency is doing. Although the facts are just This new level of direct access apparently sis of your behavior. beginning to emerge, information that has includes both some of the gateways through come to light about the NSA’s activities and which phone calls are routed, as well as other Use of these statistical fishing expeditions capabilities over the years, as well as the recent key nodes through which a large proportion has been made possible by the access to reporting by the New York Times and others, of Internet traffic passes. This new program communications streams granted by key cor- allows us to discern the outlines of what they also recognizes that today’s voice and porations. The NSA may also be engaging in are likely doing and how they are doing it. Internet communications systems are “geographic targeting,” in which they listen in increasingly converging, with a rising propor- on communications between the United The NSA is not only the world’s largest spy tion of even voice phone calls moving to the States and a particular foreign country or agency (far larger than the CIA, for example), Internet via VOIP, and parts of the old tele- region. More broadly, data mining has been but it possesses the most advanced technol- phone transmission system being converted greatly facilitated by underlying changes in ogy for intercepting communications. We to fiber optic cable and used for both data and technology that have taken place in the past know it has long had the ability to focus pow- voice communications. While data and voice few years (see page 3). erful surveillance capabilities on particular sometimes travel together and sometimes do individuals or communications. But the cur- not, and we do not know exactly which This dragnet approach is not only bad for civil rent scandal has indicated two new and sig- “switches” and other access points the NSA liberties – it is also a bad use of our scarce nificant elements of the agency’s has tapped, what appears certain is that the security and law enforcement resources. In eavesdropping: NSA is looking at both. fact, the creation of large numbers of waste- ful and distracting leads is one of the primary The NSA has gained direct access to the And most significantly, access to these reasons that many security experts say data telecommunications infrastructure through “switches” and other network hubs give the mining and other dragnet strategies are a some of America’s largest companies agency access to a direct feed of all the com- poor way of preventing crime and terrorism. The agency appears to be not only targeting munications that pass through them, and the The New York Times confirmed that point, with individuals, but also using broad “data min- ability to filter, sift through, analyze, read, or its report that the NSA has sent the FBI a ing” systems that allow them to intercept and share those communications as it sees fit. “flood” of tips generated by mass domestic evaluate the communications of millions of eavesdropping and data mining, virtually all people within the United States. of which led to dead ends that wasted the DATA MINING FBI’s resources. “We’d chase a number, find The ACLU has prepared a map (see page 2) The other major novelty in the NSA’s activities it’s a schoolteacher with no indication they’ve illustrating how all this is believed to work. It appears to be the exploitation of a new con- ever been involved in international terrorism,” shows how the military spying agency has cept in surveillance that has attracted a lot of one former FBI agent told the Times. “After you extended its tentacles into much of the U.S. attention in the past few years: what is com- get a thousand numbers and not one is turning civilian communications infrastructure, monly called “data mining.” Unlike the up anything, you get some frustration.”2 including, it appears, the “switches” through agency’s longstanding practice of spying on which international and some domestic com- specific individuals and communications COMBINING TELECOMMUNICATIONS munications are routed, Internet exchange based upon some source of suspicion, data AND OTHER PRIVATE DATA? points, individual telephone company central mining involves formula-based searches The NSA has historically been in the business facilities, and Internet Service Providers through mountains of data for individuals of intercepting and analyzing communica- (ISP). While we cannot be certain about these whose behavior or profile is in some way sus- tions data. One question is whether or not secretive links, this chart shows a represen- piciously different from the norm. this communications data is being combined tation of what is, according to recent reports, with other intimate details about our lives. A the most likely picture of what is going on. Data mining is a broad dragnet. Instead of few years ago, the Pentagon began work on targeting you because you once received a an breathtaking data mining program called CORPORATE BEDFELLOWS telephone call from a person who received a Total Information Awareness, which envi- One major new element of the NSA’s spying telephone call from a person who is a sus- sioned programming computers to trawl machinery is its ability to tap directly into the pected terrorist, you might be targeted through an extensive list of information on major communications switches, routing sta- because the NSA’s computers have analyzed Americans (including, according to the pro- tions, or access points of the telecommunica- your communications and have determined gram’s own materials, “Financial, Education, tions system. For example, according to the that they contain certain words or word com- Travel, Medical, Veterinary, Country Entry, New York Times, the NSA has worked with binations, addressing information, or other Place/Event Entry, Transportation, Housing, “the leading companies” in the telecommuni- factors with a frequency that deviates from Critical Resources, Government, cations industry to collect communications the average, and which they have decided Communications”) in the hunt for “suspicious” patterns, and has gained access “to switches might be an indication of suspiciousness. The patterns of activity. Congress decisively EAVESDROPPING 101 2 THE NSA SURVEILLANCE OCTOPUS NSA NSA TAP TELCO NSA TELCO TAP ISP CENTRAL NSA UNDERSEAS INTERNET NSA SWITCH CABLE TAP NSA UNDERSEAS NSA EXCHANGE TAP N CENTRAL T A CABLE TAP S SWITCH TAP A NSA NSA P ISP INTERNEISPT EXCHANGE HQ ISP INTERNET EXCHANGE NSA INTERNET N TAP EXCHANGE T A S A T T P ERNE INT INTERNET N NGE XCHA E NSA EXCHANGE T A CENTRAL S A DATA HUB NSA P SWITCH ISPENTRAL C TELCOCENTRAL TCH SWI SWITCH NSA facilities INTERNET INTERNET EXCHANGE civilian EXCHANGELCO TE NSA TELCO TAP communications Schematic diagram - facilities shown are CENTRAL representational only SWITCH Yakima listening post One way that telephone calls divided into Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 exchanges. The Tier 1 TELCO and other communications are sent from the United NSA exchanges, typically located in big cities, are the ones that States to Asia and other destinations is via satellite and DATA HUB have national and global reach and are likely to be of most microwave transmissions. This NSA satellite facility on interest to the NSA. a restricted Army firing range in Yakima, Washington ISP NSA SA N sweeps in millions of communications an hour from NSA UNDERSEAS Underseas cable tap According to published reports, HUB ATA D international communications satellites. CABLED ATATAP HUB American divers were able to install surveillance INTERNET devices onto the transoceanic cables that carry phone Sugar Grove listening post One way that telephone EXCHANGE calls and data across the seas. One of these taps was NSA RSEAS UNDE SA callsN and other communications are sent from the NSATAP UNDERSEASdiscovered in 1982, but other devices apparently contin- AP AP T E ABL C United States to Europe and other destinations is via CABLE TAP ued to function undetected. The advent of fiber-optic satellite and microwave transmissions. This NSA satel- ISPISP cables posed challenges for the NSA, but there is no NSA NSA lite facility, located in an isolated valley in Sugar Grove, NNSACSAENTRALNSA reason to believe that that problem remained unsolved SWITCH NAP SAT West Virginia, sweeps in millions of communications an HQ TAP by the agency. DATA HUB HQ hour from international communications satellites. INTINTERNEERNET T ISP The NSA’s headquarters Tens of thousands of peo- NSA TEEXCHAELCOXCHANSANGENGE SA N Internet Service Provider (ISP) The NSA may be NSA ple, including intelligence analysts, linguists and com- NSA UNDEISPHQ HQ RSEASforcing ISPs to provide it with information in the form of HQ puter professionals, work at this complex in Fort Meade, CABLE TAP INTERNET a computer tap (similar to a controversial FBI device Maryland outside of Washington, DC. NSA headquarters EXCHANGE dubbed “Carnivore”) that scans all the communications CENTRALCENTRAL is where the millions of intercepted communications are INTERNENSA T that reach that ISP. SWISWITCHTCH processed and analyzed. EXCHATAPNGE Central switch These facilities, one in New York and Telco: Domestic telephone company The NSA is CENTRAL one in Northern California, are operated by major TETELCOLCO apparently hooking in to U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electronic Communications Surveillance
    Electronic Communications Surveillance LAUREN REGAN “I think you’re misunderstanding the perceived problem here, Mr. President. No one is saying you broke any laws. We’re just saying it’s a little bit weird that you didn’t have to.”—John Oliver on The Daily Show1 The government is collecting information on millions of citizens. Phone, Internet, and email habits, credit card and bank records—vir- tually all information that is communicated electronically is subject to the watchful eye of the state. The government is even building a nifty, 1.5 million square foot facility in Utah to house all of this data.2 With the recent exposure of the NSA’s PRISM program by whistleblower Edward Snowden, many people—especially activists—are wondering: How much privacy do we actually have? Well, as far as electronic pri- vacy, the short answer is: None. None at all. There are a few ways to protect yourself, but ultimately, nothing in electronic communications is absolutely protected. In the United States, surveillance of electronic communications is governed primarily by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), which is an extension of the 1968 Federal Wiretap act (also called “Title III”) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Other legislation, such as the USA PATRIOT Act and the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), sup- plement both the ECPA and FISA. The ECPA is divided into three broad areas: wiretaps and “electronic eavesdropping,” stored messages, and pen registers and trap-and-trace devices. Each degree of surveillance requires a particular burden that the government must meet in order to engage in the surveillance.
    [Show full text]
  • FBI's Carnivore: How Federal Agents May Be Viewing Your Personal E-Mail and Why There Is Nothing You Can Do About It
    The FBI's Carnivore: How Federal Agents May Be Viewing Your Personal E-Mail and Why There Is Nothing You Can Do About It PETER J. GEORGITON* Much controversy has arisen over the FBI's proposal to use an e-mail and Internet surveillanceprogram, named "Carnivore," to assist its law enforcement efforts on the Information Superhighway. In this note, the authorexamines how Carnivoreoperates and its implicationsfor individuals 'privacy rights under the Fourth Amendment and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA). The author concludes that the current state of constitutional and statutory law governing electronicsurveillance indicates that the FBI can utilize Carnivore to conduct a wide range of intrusive searches with little or no legal justification. Carnivore'sability to retrieve more than mere e-mail messages of suspects, the FBI's checkered past on privacy issues, and the lack ofjudicial oversight make the potentialfor abuse of Carnivoregreat. As a result, Congress must take a hard look at both the ECPA and Carnivore to prevent law enforcement agenciesfrom using Carnivore to peer into our personal e-mails and Internet usage. Whether he wrote DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER, or whether he refrainedfrom writing it, made no difference.... The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed-would still have committed, even ifhe had never set pen to paper-the essential crime that contained all others in itself Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealedforever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or laterthey were bound to get you.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Technical Review of the Carnivore System Final Report
    Contract No. 00-C-0328 IITRI CR-030-216 Independent Technical Review of the Carnivore System Final Report 8 December 2000 Contract No. 00-C-0328 IITRI CR-030-216 Independent Review of the Carnivore System Final Report Prepared by: Stephen P. Smith J. Allen Crider Henry H. Perritt, Jr. Mengfen Shyong Harold Krent Larry L. Reynolds Stephen Mencik 8 December 2000 IIT Research Institute Suite 400 8100 Corporate Drive Lanham, Maryland 20785-2231 301-731-8894 FAX 301-731-0253 IITRI CR-030-216 CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................................. vii ES.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... vii ES.2 Scope............................................................................................................................. vii ES.3 Approach....................................................................................................................... viii ES.4 Observations ................................................................................................................. viii ES.5 Conclusions................................................................................................................... xii ES.6 Recommendations......................................................................................................... xiv Section 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose.........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Help I Am an Investigative Journalist in 2017
    Help! I am an Investigative Journalist in 2017 Whistleblowers Australia Annual Conference 2016-11-20 About me • Information security professional Gabor Szathmari • Privacy, free speech and open gov’t advocate @gszathmari • CryptoParty organiser • CryptoAUSTRALIA founder (coming soon) Agenda Investigative journalism: • Why should we care? • Threats and abuses • Surveillance techniques • What can the reporters do? Why should we care about investigative journalism? Investigative journalism • Cornerstone of democracy • Social control over gov’t and private sector • When the formal channels fail to address the problem • Relies on information sources Manning Snowden Tyler Shultz Paul Stevenson Benjamin Koh Threats and abuses against investigative journalism Threats • Lack of data (opaque gov’t) • Journalists are imprisoned for doing their jobs • Sources are afraid to speak out Journalists’ Privilege • Evidence Amendment (Journalists’ Privilege) Act 2011 • Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015 Recent Abuses • The Guardian: Federal police admit seeking access to reporter's metadata without warrant ! • The Intercept: Secret Rules Makes it Pretty Easy for the FBI to Spy on Journalists " • CBC News: La Presse columnist says he was put under police surveillance as part of 'attempt to intimidate’ # Surveillance techniques Brief History of Interception First cases: • Postal Service - Black Chambers 1700s • Telegraph - American Civil War 1860s • Telephone - 1890s • Short wave radio -1940s / 50s • Satellite (international calls) - ECHELON 1970s Recent Programs (2000s - ) • Text messages, mobile phone - DISHFIRE, DCSNET, Stingray • Internet - Carnivore, NarusInsight, Tempora • Services (e.g. Google, Yahoo) - PRISM, MUSCULAR • Metadata: MYSTIC, ADVISE, FAIRVIEW, STORMBREW • Data visualisation: XKEYSCORE, BOUNDLESSINFORMANT • End user device exploitation: HAVOK, FOXACID So how I can defend myself? Data Protection 101 •Encrypt sensitive data* in transit •Encrypt sensitive data* at rest * Documents, text messages, voice calls etc.
    [Show full text]
  • FBI's Carnivore: Under the Fourth Amendment and the USA Patriot
    1 OKLA. J. L. & TECH. 2 (2003) (formerly 2003 OKJOLT Rev. 2) www.okjolt.org Abstract Scott Griner, a 2003 University of Oklahoma Law School graduate introduces us to the FBI=s email monitoring system, Carnivore. After a brief description of Carnivore and its use in criminal investigations, Mr. Griner analyzes Carnivore under the Fourth Amendment. Finally, Mr. Griner examines The USA PATRIOT Act=s impact on the FBI=s use of Carnivore and the future of electronic surveillance and searches. FBI’S CARNIVORE: UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND THE USA PATRIOT ACT Scott Griner I. Introduction In the mid-1990=s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recognized the use of the internet and e-mail by the criminal element to defeat traditional methods of surveillance. In 1996, the FBI developed the Omnivore program but abandoned it due to technical difficulties. The FBI then created a number of programs to replace Omnivore. The current version of these programs, known as the ADragonWare Suite,@1 contains the ACarnivore@ and computer program. The FBI claims Carnivore is a tool that Asurgically@2 monitors e- mail between certain suspect parties while allowing e-mail of other parties to remain private. The first part of this paper will perform a Fourth Amendment analysis regarding the use of the Carnivore program. The second part will explore the effects of the USA PATRIOT Act on the 1 FBI=s Carnivore Hunts in a Pack, MSNBC, Oct. 17, 2000, available at http://zdnet.com.com/2102-11-524798.html (last visited Jan. 9, 2003). 2 Carnivore Diagnostic Tool, available at http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/carnivore/carnivore2.html (last visited Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • Edwards CX Debate Topic Analysis Part 1D
    Surveillance Topic Terms, p. 1 TERMS IN USE ON THE SURVEILLANCE TOPIC Dr. Rich Edwards Professor of Communication Studies Baylor University American Community Survey (ACS): This subset of the U.S. Census asks intrusive questions such as the number of times a person has been married, whether they have a mortgage on their home and whether they are enrolled in a health care plan. The ACS selects a sample size of about 2.5 percent of households each year to complete the survey. The ACS is controversial not only because of its intrusiveness, but also because participation is mandatory – the federal government reportedly pursues participants with phone calls, visits and threats of jail time if they refuse to complete the form. Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT): This is the name given to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s system for storing the fingerprints and facial recognition data for persons applying for visas, immigration benefits and the Visa Waiver Program (VWP). The system also stores biometric data for suspected terrorists and immigration law violators. Big Data Research and Development Initiative: The Obama administration launched this program in 2012, providing about $200 million with the announced purpose of “transforming our ability to use Big Data for scientific discovery, environmental and biomedical research, education and national security.” Six federal agencies are involved in the initiative, led by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) – the same agency that created the controversial Total Information Awareness program. Biometrics: This term refers to the use for identification purposes of any of the persistent characteristics of the human body.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom on the Net 2009
    0100101001100110101100100101001100 110101101000011001101011001001010 011001101011001001010011001101011 0010010100110011010110010010100110 011010110010010100110011010110100Freedom 101001100110101100100101001100110 1011001001010011001101011001001010on the Net 0110011010110010010100110011010110 0100101001100110101101001010011001 1010110010010100110010101100100101a global assessment of internet 0011001101011001001010011001101011and digital media 0010010100101001010011001101011001 0010100110011010110100001100110101 1001001010011001101011001001010011 0011010110010010100110011010110010 0101001100110010010100110011010110 0100101001100110101101000011001101 0110010010100110011010110010010100 1100110101100100101001100110101100 1001010011001101011001001010011001 1010110100101001100110101100100101 0011001101011001001010011001101011 0010110010010100101001010011001101 0110010010100110011010110100001100 1101011001001010011001101011001001 0100110011010110010010100110011010 1100100101001100110101100100101001 1001101011010010100110011010110010 0101001100110101100100101001100110 1011001001010011001101011001001010 FREEDOM ON THE NET A Global Assessment of Internet and Digital Media April 1, 2009 Freedom House Freedom on the Net Table of Contents Page Overview Essay Access and Control: A Growing Diversity of Threats to Internet Freedom .................... 1 Freedom on the Net Methodology ........................................................................................................... 12 Charts and Graphs of Key Findings ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Carnivore: Is the Regulation of Wireless Technology a Legally Viable Option to Curtail the Growth of Cybercrime?
    Washington University Journal of Law & Policy Volume 11 Promoting Justice Through Interdisciplinary Teaching, Practice, and Scholarship January 2003 Carnivore: Is the Regulation of Wireless Technology a Legally Viable Option to Curtail the Growth of Cybercrime? Stephen W. Tountas Washington University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Stephen W. Tountas, Carnivore: Is the Regulation of Wireless Technology a Legally Viable Option to Curtail the Growth of Cybercrime?, 11 WASH. U. J. L. & POL’Y 351 (2003), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol11/iss1/14 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Journal of Law & Policy by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Carnivore: Is the Regulation of Wireless Technology a Legally Viable Option to Curtail the Growth of Cybercrime? * Stephen W. Tountas INTRODUCTION On July 11, 2000, the Wall Street Journal1 lifted the two-year shroud of secrecy on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) “Carnivore”2 program. The FBI designed Carnivore to sift through the contents of a suspect’s e-mail and, when appropriate, to record the suspect’s e-mail address for further review. In response to privacy concerns, the FBI pointed to the rise in cybercrime as a national security threat justifying the use of programs such as Carnivore.3 In July of 2001, despite much criticism,4 the FBI announced its goal to * J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • It's Too Complicated: How the Internet Upends Katz, Smith, and Electronic
    Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 30, Number 1 Fall 2016 IT’S TOO COMPLICATED: HOW THE INTERNET UPENDS KATZ, SMITH, AND ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE LAW Steven M. Bellovin, Matt Blaze, Susan Landau, & Stephanie K. Pell* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 2 II. LEGAL BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS ........................................... 11 A. Content/Non-Content Constitutional Distinctions & Statutory Definitions ................................................................ 12 B. What Other Scholars Have Said and Done ................................ 20 1. To Distinguish and Categorize or Not? ................................... 21 C. Third Party Doctrine Complications ......................................... 22 1. United States v. Warshak......................................................... 22 2. Miller & Smith ......................................................................... 25 III. NETWORK ARCHITECTURES ......................................................... 32 A. The Phone Network and the Internet .......................................... 34 B. An Introduction to the Network Stack ........................................ 36 C. Architectural Content ................................................................. 44 D. Defining DRAS ........................................................................... 46 IV. INTERNET SERVICES AND METADATA .......................................... 52 A. Services and Architecture ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Carnivore: the Uneasy Relationship Between the Fourth Amendment and Electronic Surveillance of Internet Communications
    CARNIVORE: THE UNEASY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE OF INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS Johnny Gilman I. THE DEBATE SURROUNDING "[w] ays may some day be developed by which the CARNIVORE AND ITS PERCEIVED government, without removing papers from secret THREAT TO FOURTH AMENDMENT drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by RIGHTS AS IT APPLIES TO INTERNET which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the COMMUNICATIONS most intimate occurrences of the home."'6 More specifically, the flexible approach in delineating The Fourth Amendment to the United States the extent of privacy rights under the Fourth Constitution explicitly provides individuals the Amendment combined with the explosion of the right to be secure from unreasonable searches Internet as a unique communications medium and seizures.' This right to privacy is not absolute, has brought society to a crossroads where serious as courts have established certain exceptions to Fourth Amendment policy decisions must be de- the rule that all searches 7 and seizures must be termined. conducted with a court-issued 2 warrant. For exam- In today's world of electronic life, the advance- ple, the Supreme Court has found that while ment of the Internet has facilitated the unfortu- there is a right to privacy in the contents of tele- nate development of a new area of criminal activ- phone 3 calls, there is no right to privacy in tele- ity. 8 As a result, issues remain unresolved phone call records. 4 Indeed, the Constitution is concerning the application of constitutional celebrated in part because of the Founders' intent rights to online activities, especially the privacy that it be applied and construed in a flexible man- and security of Internet communications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Need for Revisions to the Law of Wiretapping and Interception of Email, 10 Mich
    Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review Volume 10 | Issue 1 2003 The eedN for Revisions to the Law of Wiretapping and Interception of Email Robert A. Pikowsky University of Idaho Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mttlr Part of the Communications Law Commons, Fourth Amendment Commons, Internet Law Commons, Legislation Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert A. Pikowsky, The Need for Revisions to the Law of Wiretapping and Interception of Email, 10 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 1 (2003). Available at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mttlr/vol10/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE NEED FOR REVISIONS TO THE LAW OF WIRETAPPING AND INTERCEPTION OF EMAIL Robert A. Pikowsky* Cite as: Robert A. Pikowsky, The Need for Revisions to the Law of Wiretapping and Interception of Email, 10 MICH. TELECOMM. TECH. L. REV. 1 (2003), available at http://www.mttlr.org/volten/pikowsky.pdf I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 2 II. MAIL SEARCHES AND OTHER COVERT SEARCHES ...................... 6 A. The Law of Mail Searches ................................................ 6 B. Other Covert Searches..................................................... 10 III. LIMITATIONS ON MAIL COVERS AND PEN REGISTERS IN THE ABSENCE OF FEDERAL FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION ...................................................... 15 A. The Law of Mail Covers .................................................. 15 B. The Law of Pen Registers ................................................ 17 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • FBI's Carnivore: Is the Government Eating Away Our Right of Privacy? Patricia K
    Roger Williams University Law Review Volume 7 Issue 1 Symposium: Information and Electronic Article 7 Commerce Law: Comparative Perspectives Fall 2001 FBI's Carnivore: Is the Government Eating Away Our Right of Privacy? Patricia K. Holmes Roger Williams University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR Recommended Citation Holmes, Patricia K. (2001) "FBI's Carnivore: Is the Government Eating Away Our Right of Privacy?," Roger Williams University Law Review: Vol. 7: Iss. 1, Article 7. Available at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR/vol7/iss1/7 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roger Williams University Law Review by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FBI's Carnivore: Is the Government Eating Away Our Right of Privacy? INTRODUCTION With the birth of the Internet has come a virtual reformation of how human society communicates. The exact number of In- ternet users is nearly incalculable, but recent assessments esti- mate that nearly 300 million people worldwide are currently online.' These users can travel relatively freely among the mil- lions of currently active Internet sites.2 The growth of this commu- nications medium in the last decade has been tremendous, and promises to continue at such a pace. The United States Depart- ment of Commerce has reported that less than 40 million people worldwide had access to the Internet in 1996. 3 This number jumped to more than 100 million people by the end of 1997.4 Fur- ther research by the Department has indicated that the number of people and businesses using the Internet doubles every 100 days.
    [Show full text]