Sat phone permit "wire"taps

I found these paragraphs in a recent Space News interesting.  They were
at the end of an article titled "Military Officials Open To Using
Civilian Links" in the July 3rd issue. 

  "Officials said government police authorities have expressed concern
that satellite telephone systems may enable people to conduct
conversations that are out of the earshot of government investigators. 
This would be particularly true in an area where, for example, there
were no gateway through which government investigators could tap into
calls. 
  "Iridium, Globalstar, Inmarsat-P and Odyssey all plan to include
features to permit authorized eavesdropping, officials said. 
  "``Iridium will include a leased land line to areas where there are
now local gateways to permit monitoring,'' Johnson said.  ``We are
willing to put the technical capability to do this in the hands of the
governments.  They then will have to pay to have all those people listen
to all those telephone calls.''" 

Ted Anderson

From: Ted_Anderson@transarc.com

   I found these paragraphs in a recent Space News interesting.  They were
   at the end of an article titled "Military Officials Open To Using
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   Civilian Links" in the July 3rd issue. 

[...]
     "Iridium, Globalstar, Inmarsat-P and Odyssey all plan to include
   features to permit authorized eavesdropping, officials said. 

Hmm. Anyone here ever heard of the Walkers, or the Rosenbergs?

It's a pity that the military has decided that in its zeal to listen
in on phone calls, that national security is an expendable asset.

It looks like the Chinese or Russian Armies won't be any better by
the time they're occupying us, unfortunately.

(The really awful part is that what friends I have that are current
or past U.S. military don't want to die, AFAIK).

Phil

On Thu, 27 Jul 1995, Phil Fraering wrote:

>    From: Ted_Anderson@transarc.com
> 
>    I found these paragraphs in a recent Space News interesting.  They were
>    at the end of an article titled "Military Officials Open To Using
>                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    Civilian Links" in the July 3rd issue. 
> 
> [...]
>      "Iridium, Globalstar, Inmarsat-P and Odyssey all plan to include
>    features to permit authorized eavesdropping, officials said. 
                        ^^^^^^^^^^

Did you miss this word?  While I suspect that you don't like Title III 
wiretaps, they are legal at present.  The above contemplates legal 
wiretaps on some phone service that might otherwise be outside the reach 
of legal wiretaps.

> Hmm. Anyone here ever heard of the Walkers, or the 
Rosenbergs? > 
> It's a pity that the military has decided that in its zeal to listen
> in on phone calls, that national security is an expendable asset.

The military is not authorized to listen in to any phone calls they want 
to hear.  Otherwise, everyone on the list, including me, would probably 
be in some hidden military prison.

:-)  for the humor-impaired.

> It looks like the Chinese or Russian Armies won't be any better by
> the time they're occupying us, unfortunately.
> 
> (The really awful part is that what friends I have that are current
> or past U.S. military don't want to die, AFAIK).
> 
> Phil
> 

EBD

Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:42:46 -0400 (EDT)
   From: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
   Mime-Version: 1.0
   Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

   On Thu, 27 Jul 1995, Phil Fraering wrote:

   >    From: Ted_Anderson@transarc.com
   > 
   >    I found these paragraphs in a recent Space News interesting.  They were
   >    at the end of an article titled "Military Officials Open To Using
   >                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   >    Civilian Links" in the July 3rd issue. 
   > 
   > [...]
   >      "Iridium, Globalstar, Inmarsat-P and Odyssey all plan to include
   >    features to permit authorized eavesdropping, officials said. 
			   ^^^^^^^^^^

   Did you miss this word?  While I suspect that you don't like Title III 
   wiretaps, they are legal at present.  The above contemplates legal 
   wiretaps on some phone service that might otherwise be outside the reach 
   of legal wiretaps.

You misunderstand. With public key encryption, the proliferation of processor
power and bandwidth, and their funding, there is NO reason whatsoever for the
MILITARY to use an intentionally WEAK encryption system.

   > Hmm. Anyone here ever heard of the Walkers, or the 
   Rosenbergs? > 
   > It's a pity that the military has decided that in its zeal to listen
   > in on phone calls, that national security is an expendable asset.

   The military is not authorized to listen in to any phone calls they want 
   to hear.  Otherwise, everyone on the list, including me, would probably 
   be in some hidden military prison.

   :-)  for the humor-impaired.


I think you misunderstood: if we want a military in the first place
(yes, I realize that's an open question to many people on this list)
it needs to have as much of its communications encrypted as possible.
Without back doors or intentionally weakened algorithms. Otherwise
we're just stuck with a standard conventional force that isn't _that_
great compared to the combined assets of a reasonable assembly of
enemy forces.

I would go even farther: since so many of the troops sent over to the Gulf
in the war there went with K-Mart-purchased GPS receivers that the military
had to turn off selective availability, I am willing to bet that in future
conflicts the U.S. soldier's ability to have secure communications (with
no backdoors or weakened algorithms) is dependent on civilians having access
to the same technology. Because the only way they might have it is if Ma
and Pa go down to the local K-Mart and buy one for their son/daughter about
to go overseas.

(I could add some stuff about GPS vs. Geostar, but I figured I've wasted
enough bandwidth already).

Phil

I've been arrested too amy times, an done enough local, state, and
federal time to know. If THEY want it, THEY will GET IT.
Consitiution or no. Just like most of us here.

And....if ya can't get it right away, ya keep hacking at it
until YA DO GET IT. It's really that simple. They do it, we do it.

The satellites are no different than anything else.

Next case........

Love Always,

Carol Anne



On Fri, 28 Jul 1995, Brian Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 1995, Phil Fraering wrote:
> >    From: Ted_Anderson@transarc.com
> >    I found these paragraphs in a recent Space News interesting.  They were
> >    at the end of an article titled "Military Officials Open To Using
> >    Civilian Links" in the July 3rd issue. 
> >      "Iridium, Globalstar, Inmarsat-P and Odyssey all plan to include
> >    features to permit authorized eavesdropping, officials said. 
> Did you miss this word?  While I suspect that you don't like Title III 
> wiretaps, they are legal at present.  The above contemplates legal 
> wiretaps on some phone service that might otherwise be outside the reach 
> of legal wiretaps.
> > It's a pity that the military has decided that in its zeal to listen
> > in on phone calls, that national security is an expendable asset.
> The military is not authorized to listen in to any phone calls they want 
> to hear.  Otherwise, everyone on the list, including me, would probably 
> be in some hidden military prison.
> 
> :-)  for the humor-impaired.

Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - WWW Page Creation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carol Anne Braddock         <--now running linux 1.0.9 for your pleasure
carolann@censored.org             __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
carolab@primenet.com             /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
carolb@spring.com               /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A great place to start
My Cyber Doc...