Used with Permission From THE SPOTLIGHT 300 Independence Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20003 Subscriptions: (202) 546-5621 Technology & Liberty November 13, 1995 ADMINISTRATION PLANS 1.5 MILLION TELEPHONE INTERCEPTS By Clark Matthews clark.matthews@paranet.org Janet Reno's Justice Department and the FBI have directed U.S. telephone companies to prepare for up to 1.5 million simultaneous, electronic intercepts on Americans' telephones. The same directive requires the nation's phone companies to complete the necessary modifications to their equipment to create this massive surveillance apparatus from America's public telephone networks. Telephone companies are directed to have these capabilities in place by October 28, 1998, one week before the 1998 elections. The Clinton administration's claimed authorization for this massive high-tech domestic surveillance machine is the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). The CALEA law is better known as infamous "Wiretap Access Bill", which has been discussed many times in these columns over the past 14 months. The CALEA law continues to be a hot topic because the proposed "Omnibus Counter-Terrorism Bill" of 1995 (H.R. 1710) contains provisions for setting up a national FBI surveillance center and paying for the national eavesdropping system with a 40% surcharge on all federal civil fines and property seizures. "CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS" The administration's eavesdropping diktats are buried in a set of technical "capacity requirements" that telephone companies are expected to meet in order to comply with the CALEA law. The capacity requirements appear on pages 53643-53646 of the Federal Register for October 16, 1995. Computer users can access this document electronically on the internet from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://www.epic.org) or by using wais (wais.access.gpo.gov). The "Capacity Requirements" published in the Federal Register correspond to a minimum of 540,000 and a maximum of 1.5 million simultaneous telephone "intercepts" in the United States. These electronic "intercepts" involve several different telephone surveillance techniques. They can record the telephone numbers you call and the numbers of people who call you, and then match the phone numbers in a special database "associating" you with your friends, relatives, acquaintances, journalists, activists, or businesses. They can also be programmed to monitor telephone conversations, intercept faxes, and record communications sessions between computer modems, including computer passwords and digital transactions. Here is a breakdown of the scope of the federal surveillance described by the capacity requirements: * Category 3 -- In 75% of the nation, phone companies must be prepared to activate federal intercepts on a maximum of 0.25% of all telephone subscribers, i.e. 250 telephones out of every 100,000. * Category 2 -- Is ill-defined. Phone companies in Category 2 areas must make their equipment capable of supporting federal interceptions on a maximum of 0.5% of all subscribers, i.e. 500 telephones per 100,000 * Category 1 -- Includes ill-defined "high interest" areas like major cities, where phone companies must be prepared to surveil 1% of all telephones, i.e. 1,000 phones per 100,000 WHAT THE NUMBERS MEAN According to FCC statistics for 1993, there were at least 150 million telephone numbers in our country -- and these figures omitted cellular phones, beepers, pagers, WATS lines, and other non-switched telephone services. Therefore Category 3 translates into 0.25% of at least 112.5 million telephones -- 281,250 intercepts nationwide. Assuming Category 2 equals 15% of the nation's phones, it translates into 0.5% of 22.5 million phones, another 122,500 potential wiretaps. Category 1 is 1% of the remaining 15 million phones: that's 150,000 more people. Add it up: 553,750 intercepts, minimum. And since "major cities" are "high interest" areas, the actual number is more likely to approach one million or more. Even these figures don't tell the whole story. The Justice Department directives have a built-in vagueness that allows areas to be re- defined. They can become "high-interest" hotspots at any time, under any circumstances. A currency crisis, for instance. Or a hotly contested election. Or perhaps a mysterious bombing provocation in the midwest. Furthermore, telephone companies do not have the luxury of meeting the minimum surveillance requirements. It's a technological reality that they must modify their equipment to meet the maximum requirements. That's because the FBI can re- define their surveillance responsibilities at any time, by branding their customers as "interesting". As the FBI's "interest" shifts from area to area, the whole country could rapidly come under the 1% surveillance directive. 1.5 million telephone intercepts. Or more. 'ONLY 1,157 WIRETAPS' The conduct of Clinton's law-enforcement leaders is especially outrageous, now that the true intentions of their KGB-like program have been revealed. When FBI Director Louis Freeh lobbied Congress for the Wiretap Bill last year, he cited FBI statistics claiming only 1,157 federal, state, and local electronic surveillance orders for all of 1993. In sworn Congressional testimony, the FBI director went on to say that his bureau had been thwarted in "several" attempts to intercept communications on specialized telephone equipment. Freeh cited obstacles like digital switches, digital loops, and similar privately owned, computerized business telephone switching systems, which he claimed prevented his agents from listening to telephone conversations, intercepting faxes, and capturing the data exchanged in computer modem sessions. The built-in interception capacity of at least 1.5 million phone subscribers is well over 1,000 times the 1993 wiretapping number given to Congress by Director Freeh. WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES The Justice Department instructed America's telephone companies to respond by November 15th in writing (in triplicate) with comments on their new national telephone surveillance requirements. Why not ask your elected representatives to drop them a line, too? Your Senators and Representative may well wonder how Louis Freeh's 1,157 1993 surveillance orders and "several" failed eavesdropping attempts turned into a license to monitor over a million phones in the nation's telephone system in less than two years. I sure do wonder. The "capacity requirements" for the 1994 Wiretap Law (CALEA) were published in the Federal Register of October 16. They are listed on pages 53643-53646. The address for comments is: Telecommunications Industry Liaison Unit (TILU), Federal Bureau of Investigation, P.O. Box 220450, Chantilly, VA 22022-0450. The FBI expects your representatives to write in triplicate. .---. .----------- * :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: / \ __ / ------ * clark.matthews@paranet.org / / \(..)/ ----- * :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ////// ' \/ ` ---- * //// / // : : --- * PERMISSION TO \\/ / * / /` '--* COPY / REPOST \*/ * //..\\ x-x-UU----UUx-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x '//||\\` N E M O..M E..I M P U N E..L A C E S S I T x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x