Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Security over SONET/SDH
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 19:56:24 -0500

On Jun 25, 2013, at 6:34 PM, sam () wwcandt com wrote:

I believe that if you encrypted your links sufficiently that it was
impossible to siphon the wanted data from your upstream the response would
be for the tapping to move down into your data center before the crypto.

With CALEA requirements and the Patriot Act they could easily compel you
to give them a span port prior to the crypto.

The value here isn't preventing <insert federal agency> from getting the data, as you point out there are multiple 
tools at their disposal, and they will likely compel data at some other point in the stack.  The value here is 
increasing the visibility of the tapping, making more people aware of how much is going on.  Forcing the tapping out of 
the shadows and into the light.

For instance if my theory that some cables are being tapped at the landing station is correct, there are likely ISP's 
on this list right now that have transatlantic links /and do not know that they are being tapped/.  If the links were 
encrypted and they had to serve the ISP directly to get the unencrypted data or make them stop encrypting, that ISP 
would know their data was being tapped.

It also has the potential to shift the legal proceedings to other courts.  The FISA court can approve tapping a foreign 
cable as it enters the country in near perfect, unchallengeable secrecy.  If encryption moved that to be a regular 
federal warrant under CALEA there would be a few more avenues for challenging the order legally.

People can't challenge what they don't know about.

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]