[159765] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CALEA options for small/midsize ISPs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jimmy Hess)
Sun Jan 20 23:59:02 2013
In-Reply-To: <8200F04ED2C5EF40B246388AD4B822A512D8A7B9@BL2PRD0512MB662.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:58:48 -0600
From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1/20/13, Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com> wrote:
[snip]
> want to play ball, they take what you give with a smile. I would be
> curious to see what would happen if a lawful intercept request came
> through and the service provider refused to process it. I have been a
The LEAs might be flexible in how they are willing to take the data.
But it would be a very dangerous proposition indeed to outright
'refuse'; I am sure most organizations would be exhausting every
reasonable course to satisfy the requirements of the order.
Forget about FCC civil penalties: the LEA may start arresting
managers responsible for refusal, on the charges of obstruction, due
to interfering with an investigation.
People might talk about refusing to process a CALEA warrant.
IF/when they do receive such a lawful order: I am almost positive
they will respond in some way other than a refusal to attempt to
comply.
So that's probably why it's not likely we will hear of a refusal
occuring, at least for a long time
> On 1/20/13 8:10 PM, "Justin Wilson" <lists@mtin.net> wrote:
[snip]
--
-JH
