The following text is
copyright 2005 by Network World, permission is hearby given for reproduction, as
long as attribution is given and this notice is included.
More questions than answers
By Scott Bradner
You can't get them all right. Its now been more than a year and a half since I complained
that the FCC was trying to deal with the complex
issue of wiretapping the Internet "with unseemly haste" and
the FCC just released yet another in a series of documents on the topic. This one, like its predecessors, leaves
the reader with more questions than answers -- and there are more documents to
come.
In March 2004 I reported on a FCC request for comments (RFC)
on applying the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) to
the Internet and Internet-based services.
("Looking for the dumb ones" - http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2004/0322bradner.html) The result of that RFC was a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM)
(http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-187A1.pdf) published
a few months later. (See "FCC
chooses middle road on 'Net wiretapping" http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2004/081604bradner.html.) That NPRM asked for comments on some of
the FCC's tentative conclusions.
The new document
(http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-153A1.pdf) represents
the FCC's final decision (called an order), based, at least somewhat, on
comments received in response to last year's NPRM. The current document also contains a new NPRM and request
for comments dealing with a number of topics but is mostly focused on the FCC's
conclusion that facilities-based broadband Internet access providers and
providers of "interconnected VoIP" are subject to the wiretapping
requirements of CALEA.
The logic that the FCC uses is often rather tortured. For example, they say that a VoIP
provider that gateways calls to and from the PSTN fits the switching
requirement because it "<ITAL>must necessarily</ITAL> use a
router or other server to do so." Of course this condition is true of all services
offered over the Internet not just interconnected VoIP so where should the
boundary be?
You should expect a large pod of lawyers will spend lots of
various clients money (including your tax dollars) arguing over the details of
the FCC decision and over the authority of the FCC to decide what it did in
light of the enabling laws. From
my strictly non-lawyer point of view I expect the courts to toss out this set
of decisions but that Congress will quickly change the law to produce about the
same result.
There is a lot of strangeness in
this document. On one had the FCC
specifically says that an Internet access provider would have "no CALEA
obligations with respect to, for example, the storage functions of its e-mail
service" while at the same time implying that the same access provider
would have to tap data going into or out of the aforementioned storage. Seems like an irrelevant difference to
me.
The FCC definition of an interconnected VoIP provider is
strangely worded - if strictly read it says that VoIP providers that both send
calls to and receive calls from the PSTN are covered but ones that only go one
way are not, nor are ones where the user can use a PSTN gateway provided by a
third party as long as the VoIP provider has no specific arrangement for using
the gateway.
For you in enterprises, the FCC still considers enterprise
networks exempt but has not yet made up its mind about a number of other
connectivity providers such as hotels.
This is far from the last word on the topic (including from
me - more next week).
disclaimer:
Rules like this are music to the ears of law school graduates but I got
no input from any of them for the above.