CALEA Requirements

Fri Mar 18 20:28:21 UTC 2016

Kevin,

That's largely true, but keep in mind that it's normal for people who have
had to fulfill a request to be disallowed from talking about it which makes
them seem even more rare than they actually are.  I'm also not familiar
with any laws that prevent state or local agencies from leveraging CALEA
and I've certainly seen it used on the voice side by state level law
enforcement.

Scott Helms
Chief Technology Officer
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Kevin Burke <kburke at burlingtontelecom.com>
wrote:

> Ignore it until you get the paperwork.  The local law enforcement can not
> get a warrant for the real time, full data capture.  Only FBI or other
> national agencies can get those subpeona's.  We went through this with our
> local police department.  They wanted to make sure we were prepared and
> wanted a test for the real time number capture on phone calls.  They didn't
> mention they don't have any equipment on their side to connect the T1.
>
> Ask your local neighbors.  Some area's have a number of local federal
> investigations.  If you get the deer in the headlights look from your
> competition then you may never get one of these.
>
> The full data captures are rare.
>
> Kevin Burke
> 802-540-0979
> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 4:47 PM
> To: 'NANOG list' <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: CALEA Requirements
>
> NANOG:
>
>
>
> Can someone point me to the current CALEA requirements?
>
>
>
> As an ISP, should I be recording all internet traffic that passes my
> routers?  Or do I only have to record when and if I receive a court order?
>
>
>
> I'm not under any court order now, I just want to be sure that I am
> compliant going forward in my capabilities.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Lorell Hathcock
>
>