Xref: utzoo rec.radio.shortwave:7521 rec.radio.amateur.policy:425 rec.radio.cb:346 sci.electronics:20527 alt.activism:14410 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!well!antenna From: antenna@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Horvitz) Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.cb,sci.electronics,alt.activism Subject: Task Force recommends amending ECPA (long) Keywords: Privacy, law, radio Message-ID: <25147@well.sf.ca.us> Date: 31 May 91 08:02:09 GMT Distribution: usa Organization: Internews Lines: 165 A "Privacy and Technology Task Force," assembled by Sen. Patrick Leahy, has recommended that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) be amended to add penalties for the intentional interception of radio signals from cordless phones, wireless data communications, personal communications networks, radio PBXs, advanced Special Mobile Radio systems, and CT2/Telepoint radiotelephones. The Task Force also recommends that the ECPA's penalties for intentional interception be adjusted to focus on "targeted surveillance of specific communications"; that manufacturers be encouraged to put warning labels on "customer premises telephone equipment"; and that Congress examine "encryption technology and its potential impact on enhancing the privacy, security, and authenticity of electronic communications." In addition, the Task Force's report (delivered to Sen. Leahy on May 28th) discusses Caller ID, ID blocking, automated dossier- building, protection for personal electronic transaction data, and government monitoring of data networks. But consensus recommendations were not offered on amending the ECPA in these areas. According to Cathy Russell, counsel for the Senate Subcommittee on Technology and the Law, Sen. Leahy has not decided how to respond to the report. No hearings are scheduled yet, and the recommendations have not been translated into draft legislation. However, something will surely be done to show that Congress cares about electronic privacy. Here is a long excerpt from the radio part of the 23-page report. Capitalized words were set in boldface in the original: "...Computer companies are experimenting with, and seeking FCC licenses for, 'wireless' modems which can transmit data between computers without the computers being wired together, either directly or through phone lines. Such modems will have applications in several environments including the transmission of data from remote sites (a kind of cellular laptop computer) as well as within an office environment (wireless local area network or LAN)... Under current FCC proceedings, there is a likelihood that such communications will not be protected unless the user goes to the expense of full data encryption. THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDS APPROPRIATE AMENDMENTS TO LEGALLY PROTECT DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS OF THIS TYPE FROM UNAUTHORIZED INTERCEPTION. "...Cordless phones have reduced the transmission power so that the phenomenon of having calls blast through on an FM radio receiver has been eliminated. Cordless phones also have begun to utilize technology which permits the call to be carried between the handset and base unit on more than one frequency. This feature can and is available to add security and privacy to the phone call. The next generation of phones will utilize digital transmission technology which will make interception more difficult. "Perhaps the most important change since 1986, though, is not technological but societal. The cordless phone, far from being a novelty item used only at `poolside,' has become ubiquitous. A leading telephone equipment supplier now sells as many cordless telephone units as wired sets. It is projected that cordless phones will be in use in 68% of American households by the end of the decade. More and more communications are being carried out by people in private, in their homes and offices, with an expectation that such calls are just like any other phone call. Given such technological changes and under such societal circumstances, the task force concluded that to relieve the government of the duty to obtain a warrant before monitoring such communications is to vitiate much of the protection which should be afforded to communications privacy by the federal wiretap law and the Fourth Amendment. THEREFORE, THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDS THAT CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO ELIMINATION OF THE EXEMPTION FOR CORDLESS PHONES, WHILE PRESERVING AN EXCEPTION FOR UNINTENTIONAL OR ACCIDENTAL PRIVATE PARTY INTERCEPTION. "In recommending both the maintenance and extension of legal protection for `wireless' radio communications, the task force is aware that inexpensive, widely available scanners and other devices are available that make it possible to intercept radio communications. The task force strongly believes that such technologies should not defeat citizens' reasonable expectation of privacy against government intrusion and that government agents should conduct electronic surveillance of the technologies described above only under appropriate court authorization. At the same time, criminal sanctions could be overbroad in criminalizing inadvertent and unintentional interceptions of radio communications by persons with access who legally possess and use scanner and other devices that intercept radio communications. The existence of monitoring devices makes it difficult to rely solely on legal protections against third-party eavesdropping. The task force is aware that legal protections may not go far enough in affording citizens real privacy protection against intentional but undetected private surveillance. For example, concerns were expressed by a number of task force members that technical privacy enhancing features for radio-based systems should be more rapidly deployed by manufacturers and service providers. "To rectify this situation, the task force does not want to overcriminalize in this area, i.e., penalize unintentional conduct. THE TASK FORCE IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE CITIZENS USING RADIO SCANNERS CAN APPROPRIATELY BE ADDRESSED BY CLEARLY SETTING FORTH INTENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE ACT, BY TYING THE CRIMINAL PENALTY TO TARGETED SURVEILLANCE OF SPECIFIC COMMUNICATIONS AND BY FURTHER ADJUSTING THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTY STRUCTURE OF THE ACT, RATHER THAN EXEMPTING WHOLE CATEGORIES OF TELEPHONE TECHNOLOGIES AND THUS MAKING THEM FAIR GAME FOR MONITORING BY GOVERNMENT AGENTS WITHOUT A WARRANT, CORPORATE SPIES, OR JUST PLAIN SNOOPS. "Second, in order to ensure that citizens both understand the vulnerability of particular radio technologies to private, intentional, illegal interception and to encourage industry to develop and market communications devices that are less vulnerable to intrusion, THE TASK FORCE ENDORSES THE CONCEPT THAT ECPA SHOULD BE AMENDED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO ENCOURAGE THE PLACEMENT OF WARNINGS AND NOTICE OF THE VULNERABILITY OF CUSTOMER PREMISES TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT ON SPECIFIC [CUSTOMER PREMISES EQUIPMENT] AND THAT MANUFACTURERS BE ENCOURAGED TO MAKE CONSUMERS AWARE OF THE TECHNICAL LEVELS OF PRIVACY ON DIFFERENT TYPES OF EQUIPMENT. The task force believes this will encourage industry to compete with each other in developing devices which are more secure. THE TASK FORCE BELIEVES CONGRESS SHOULD WORK WITH THE FCC, INDUSTRY, AND TECHNICAL EXPERTS TO FUTHER EXPLORE WAYS TO ENHANCE THE SECURITY OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF EQUIPMENT AND TO FURTHER EXPLORE WAYS TO ENHANCE CONSUMER AWARENESS OF THE SECURITY OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF EQUIPMENT AND LAWS PERTAINING TO COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY. IN PARTICULAR, THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDS THE EXAMINATION OF ENCRYPTION TECHNOLOGY AND ITS POTENTIAL IMPACT ON ENHANCING THE PRIVACY, SECURITY, AND AUTHENTICITY OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS. THE TASK FORCE FURTHER ENCOURAGES COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS TO CONTINUE TO EXPLORE THE INCORPORATION OF ENCRYPTION AND OTHER PRIVACY ENHANCING FEATURES IN NEW COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, SO AS TO IMPROVE COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY..." - - - - - rh: While I disagree with many parts of this report, at least there is some recognition that receiver owners have rights, too, and not just those who transmit. If you would like to express your views on the report, or suggest possible amendments to the ECPA, you can write to: John Podesta Chairman, Privacy & Technology Task Force 424 C Street NE Washington, DC 20002 or Senator Patrick Leahy, Chairman Subcommittee on Technology and the Law 815 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 -- !.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.| Robert Horvitz 1122-1/2 E St. SE Washington, DC 20003-2232 USA uucp: ...uunet!capital!rhorvitz