In three easy pieces, we discuss how Washington, D.C., London, and Beijing principals produce principles for governing the Internet. Three pieces on three issues: police power, incumbent lobbying, and personal privacy.

Just be thankful you're not getting all the government you're paying for.
— Humorist, Will Rogers (1879-1935)

by Patricia Fusco
of internetnews.com

Three's Company: Police Power

Twenty-eight House members sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno urging her to suspend the operation of the Carnivore cyber snooping system while it's inner workings are under review.

House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) set up a Web poll asking the public for their views on the issue of government surveillance and the Internet.

Currently 92 percent of the respondents say that Carnivore should be banned because it allows the government to invade users privacy. Only 8 percent believe that the government's data tapping system should be maintained to track criminal activity on the Internet.

In its letter to Reno, the gang of 28 expressed strong reservations about the Internet monitoring system developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Representatives asked that Reno suspend any activity involving the development or use of Carnivore until serious privacy issues could be addressed.

Reno responds
Reno responded Thursday, by describing the two-step process she would seek to review the FBI's use of Carnivore.

During her weekly Justice Department news briefing, Reno said the first step would be for a group of academic experts to conduct a detailed review of the program's source code works.

"Those experts will report their findings to a panel of interested parties, people from the telecommunications and computer industries, as well as privacy experts," Reno said.

FBI officials maintain the court-authorized data taps would only focus on criminal suspects who are targets of an investigation. But privacy advocates fear the system may cast too wide a net on the Net, and harvest private information about legal activities, along with criminal's e-mails.

Reno said the two-step process was worked out with the FBI, and that she wanted the review to be done "as soon as possible.'' She said the system would not be suspended until the review has been completed.

You've got warrants
USA Today reported that this year the nation's largest Internet service provider experienced an 800 percent increase in the number of warrants its been served since 1997. According to court records in Loudoun County, VA, America Online, Inc. was served 301 search warrants aimed at discovering the identity and activities of AOL subscribers by state and local authorities.

This year, state and local investigators had served 191 warrants on AOL through July 17, according to the same report. AOL representatives would not comment as to whether it used Carnivore to gather e-surveillance for federal investigations, or not.

Action UK
Across the Atlantic, the House of Lords passed its e-mail snooping law. The ruling Labor Party's Regulation and Investigatory Powers Bill was approved on Wednesday. It now goes to the Queen for the formality of Royal Assent. (For uk.internet.com's collected news stories on this, click here, and see the final news item here: "RIP: the final analysis" )

Known in short as RIP, the government says the bill merely updates police powers to intercept and monitor communications, bringing them up to speed with technologically sophisticated criminals. People who refuse to yield encryption keys and codes could face up to two years in jail.

The government has conceded that, in most cases, companies will be able to hand over printed text rather than encryption keys needed to unscramble coded e-mail.

In the U.K., the home secretary must personally approve all interception warrants and money that may be offered to companies that are asked to install monitoring equipment, much like the FBI must secure a court order to install Carnivore on an Internet service provider's servers.

Business groups warned that the law could send e-businesses entities scurrying off the Island in droves, while civil rights groups raised concerns about infringements on personal privacy.

No penalties for police abuse
The U.K. Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties group considers the law problematic and inadequate because there are no penalties for abuse of the data tapping system if the government or police authorities overstep their bounds.

Yaman Akdeniz, U.K. Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties director, said the groups concerns were ignored.

"The government once again failed to provide adequate safeguards for the protection of seized encryption keys," Akdeniz. "We will continue to oppose government access to encryption keys."

Dr. Brian Gladman, the group's technology policy advisor, said businesses would not readily give encryption keys to the government.

"The Bill has finally set a requirement for seized keys to be kept safe but the draft Code of Practice sets no standards for this purpose; in consequence the interests of key owners are still at risk," Gladman said. "I really cannot see anyone who takes their security seriously being willing to risk their keys in such an inadequate regime."

Police Power

>Broadband Access

Personal Privacy