Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site rpics.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rpics!weltyrp
From: weltyrp@rpics.UUCP (Richard Welty)
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio,net.dcom
Subject: Re: Re: Listen to phone calls on your tvro
Message-ID: <182@rpics.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Sep-85 18:32:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: rpics.182
Posted: Wed Sep 11 18:32:46 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Sep-85 04:48:50 EDT
References: <338@nicmad.UUCP> <780@vortex.UUCP> <95@l5.uucp>
Organization: RPI CS Department, Troy  NY
Lines: 28
Xref: watmath net.ham-radio:3225 net.dcom:1283

> The last time the wiretapping laws were hacked, the NSA suggested (and
> got) a small wording change that effectively makes it legal to listen
> in AS LONG AS YOU ONLY LISTEN TO TELCO SIGNALLING rather than user
> data/speech.  This means that, for example, receiving microwave phone
> transmissions is defensible if your equipment filters out all but the
> "who called who" info.  They wanted this because it gives them a legal
> reason to have tapping equipment always installed.  (Who's to know if
> their equipment happens to switch to recording speech or data if an
> interesting phone number makes or receives a call?)

Actually, traffic analysis (knowledge of the sources and destinations
of a large group of messages) is an extremely useful form of intellegence
collection  -- knowledge of where and in what volume is remarkably useful.
Thus, even if NSA equipment only checked destination and source for a
message, they would certainly have a use for the information.

I don't want them to listen to me, but I also don't want them to know my
correspondents, either ...
-- 
				Rich Welty

	(I am both a part-time grad student at RPI and a full-time
	 employee of a local CAE firm, and opinions expressed herein
	 have nothing to do with anything at all)

	CSNet:   weltyrp@rpi
	ArpaNet: weltyrp.rpi@csnet-relay
	UUCP:  seismo!rpics!weltyrp