1994-08-09 - Re: Digital Telephony Act

Header Data

From: mccoy@io.com (Jim McCoy)
To: koontzd@lrcs.loral.com (David Koontz)
Message Hash: 18df1e30d129038039a06b92bd4aec83dc6ff9d4528c25f6bc4e73f0661729c3
Message ID: <199408091957.OAA10546@pentagon.io.com>
Reply To: <9408091909.AA15015@io.lrcs.loral.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-08-09 20:02:35 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 9 Aug 94 13:02:35 PDT

Raw message

From: mccoy@io.com (Jim McCoy)
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 94 13:02:35 PDT
To: koontzd@lrcs.loral.com (David Koontz)
Subject: Re: Digital Telephony Act
In-Reply-To: <9408091909.AA15015@io.lrcs.loral.com>
Message-ID: <199408091957.OAA10546@pentagon.io.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> Whats going to happen when direct satellite phone service becomes a
> reality ( as in the joint Loral/Qualcomm effort ) ?
> Do the Feds think this is can be won?

There is a clause in the Digital Telephony Act that states that the
wiretapping requirements are waived if the technology is fundementally
unable to provide this service to law enforcement due to it's design.  This
little bit leads me to believe that we might see telco designers putting a
bit of effort to make the designs untappable from the start to get around
such requirements if there is a market for it.  It was probably put in for
sats and wireless services, but in the right hands it might be a useful
loophole to drive a crypto truck through...