Politech is the oldest Internet resource devoted to politics and
technology. Launched in 1994 by Declan
McCullagh, the mailing list has chronicled the growing
intersection of culture, technology, politics, and law. Since
2000, so has the Politech web site.
ACLU letter opposing FBI Carnivore surveillance system
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 00:30:30 -0400
- To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu
- Subject: FC: ACLU letter opposing FBI Carnivore surveillance system
- From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
*********
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:36:02 -0400
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
From: Barry Steinhardt <Barrys@aclu.org>
Subject: Carnivore Letter
Declan,
Below is the text of the letter that the ACLU sent today to the House
Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution regarding the FBI's aptly named
"CARNIVORE" system for intercepting email. This is the system that was the
subject of this morning's story in the Wall Street Journal.
Barry Steinhardt
July 11, 2000
VIA FAX
Hon. Charles T. Canady, Chairman Hon. Melvin L. Watt,
Ranking Member
Constitution Subcommittee of the Constitution Subcommittee
of the
House Judiciary Committee House Judiciary Committee
362 Ford House Office Bldg. 362 Ford House Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20515-6220 Washington, D.C.
20515-6220
Dear Representatives Canady and Watt:
We are writing to you about the new FBI email surveillance system aptly
named "Carnivore," which gives law enforcement extraordinary power to
intercept and analyze huge volumes of email. The Carnivore system gives law
enforcement email interception capabilities that were never contemplated
when Congress passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA),
codified in relevant part at 18 U.S.C. 2510-22 and 18 USC 3121-27.
Carnivore raises new legal issues that cry out for Congressional attention
if we are to preserve Fourth Amendment rights in the digital age.
The existence of Carnivore first came to light in the April 6 testimony of
Attorney Robert Corn-Revere to the Constitution Subcommittee. Its operation
was further detailed in a report that appeared in today's Wall Street
Journal (copy attached). According to these reports, the Carnivore system
-- essentially a computer running specialized software-- is attached
directly to an Internet Service Provider's (ISP) network. Carnivore is
attached either when law enforcement has a Title III order from a court
permitting it to intercept in real time the contents of the electronic
communications of a specific individual, or a trap and trace or pen
register order allowing to it obtain the "numbers" related to
communications from or to a specified target.
But unlike the operation of a traditional a pen register, trap and trace
device, or wiretap of a conventional phone line, Carnivore gives the FBI
access to all traffic over the ISP's network, not just the communications
to or from a particular target. Carnivore, which is capable of analyzing
millions of messages per second, purportedly retains only the messages of
the specified target, although this process takes place without scrutiny of
either the ISP or a court.
Carnivore permits access to the email of every customer of an ISP and the
email of every person who communicates with them. Carnivore is roughly
equivalent to a wiretap capable of accessing the contents of the
conversations of all of the phone company's customers, with the "assurance"
that the FBI will record only conversations of the specified target. This
"trust us, we are the Government" approach is the antithesis of the
procedures required under our the wiretapping laws. They authorize limited
electronic surveillance of the communications of specified persons, usually
conducted by means of specified communications devices. They place on the
provider of the communications medium the responsibility to separate the
communications of persons authorized to be intercepted from other
communications.
Currently, law enforcement is required to "minimize" its interception of
non-incriminating communications of a target of a wiretap order. Carnivore
is not a minimization tool. Instead, Carnivore maximizes law enforcement
access to the communications of non-targets.
In his testimony to your subcommittee Mr. Corn-Revere described the
experience of his client, an ISP that was required to install Carnivore
when presented with a trap and trace order. He detailed his client's
concerns that a trap and trace order in the context of the Internet
revealed information that Congress did not contemplate when it authorized
their limited use. In the traditional telephone context, those orders
reveal nothing more than the numbers dialed to or from a single telephone
line. In the Internet context, these orders and certainly Carnivore, likely
involve ascertaining the suspect's e-mail address, as well as header
information that may provide information regarding the content of the
communication.
As we have stated previously, the ACLU does not believe that it is clear
that the Government can serve an order on an Internet service provider and
obtain the e-mail addresses of incoming and outgoing messages for a
particular subscriber. Further, it is not clear whether law enforcement
agents use or should use authority under the pen register statute to access
a variety of data, including Internet Protocol addresses, dialup numbers
and e-mail logs. We certainly do not believe that it is clear that law
enforcement can install a super trap and trace device that access to such
information for all of an ISP's subscribers.
In light of the new revelations about Carnivore, the ACLU urges the
Subcommittee to accelerate its consideration of the application of the 4th
Amendment in the digital age. Legislation should make it clear that law
enforcement agents may not use devices that allow access to electronic
communications involving only persons other than a specified target for
which it has a proper order. Such legislation should make clear that a trap
and trace order served on an ISP does not authorize access to the contents
of any communication including the subject line of a communication -- and
that the ISP bears the burden of protecting the privacy of communications
to which FBI access has not been granted.
We would be happy to work with the Subcommittee on drafting legislation
that protects the privacy rights of Americans.
Sincerely,
Laura W. Murphy
Director, ACLU Washington National Office
Barry Steinhardt
Associate Director, ACLU
Gregory T. Nojeim
Legislative Counsel, ACLU Washington National Office
cc: Members of the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee
Barry Steinhardt
Barrys@aclu.org
Associate Director
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad St. New York, NY 10004
212 549 2508 (v) 212 549 2656 (f)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to politechbot.com