Article View: sci.crypt
Article #1425Re: Registered Keys - why the need?
From: David Barton
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 22:34
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 22:34
48 lines
2975 bytes
2975 bytes
In article <1992Nov7.145606.1684@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> denning@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes: The main cost, I believe, is the labor of listening, not the labor of installing the intercept. They put 2 people on simultaneously for 3 shifts a day and 7 days a week. Although my back of the envelope calculation fails to account for the savings that would come from scaling, the real costs for large scale surveillance would nonetheless have to be staggering. It would be like going back to the use of human beings for the telephone switches! The operative term here is, "keyword searches". There is a reason the NSA sponsers research in natural language recognition. But perhaps the more important point is that they could not do it because it is illegal under Title 18 to tap without an order. I really don't see how some gov't agency could embark on massive surveillance without someone finding out and throwing the books at them. I envy your faith in the government. I do not share it. The government does a great many things that are illegal. Some of these are found out about in retrospect, and made public. We can only speculate about how many are not. Another point about intercepts that seems to be misunderstood has to do with minimization. If the gov't is listening, they have to turn it off if the conversation turns to something unrelated to the court order. They can periodically check, but even with a court order they are not allowed to listen to everything. And if evidence uncovered in a tap that is not covered by the warrent, it is inadmissible. This does not mean that they stop listening. It's a very tedious, tiring job and law enforcers groan when they Ifind out they have to do a tap. The myth of folks eager to wiretap everyone is nothing like the reality. If everyone played by the rules, there would be a lot fewer objections to government power in general. I note that you did not address my comments concerning whether the registration scheme would even help the government in those cases it is trying to build. Dave Barton dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<DLB.92Nov8173454@fanny.wash.inmet.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!ames!sun-barr!olivea!news.bbn.com!noc.near.net!inmet!inmet!dlbReferences:
<715.517.uupcb@grapevine.lrk.ar.us> <1992Nov01.233637.138278@watson.ibm.com> <DLB.92Nov4100421@fanny.wash.inmet.com> <1992Nov7.145606.1684@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!ames!sun-barr!olivea!news.bbn.com!noc.near.net!inmet!inmet!dlb From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton) Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,talk.politics.guns Subject: Re: Registered Keys - why the need? Message-ID: <DLB.92Nov8173454@fanny.wash.inmet.com> Date: 8 Nov 92 22:34:54 GMT References: <715.517.uupcb@grapevine.lrk.ar.us> <1992Nov01.233637.138278@watson.ibm.com> <DLB.92Nov4100421@fanny.wash.inmet.com> <1992Nov7.145606.1684@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA Lines: 48 In-Reply-To: denning@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu's message of 7 Nov 92 14:56:06 -0500 Nntp-Posting-Host: fanny.wash