Skip to main content

Brian Shields explains the intricacies of international wire-tapping

New blogs take time to develop a personality, so checking back periodically is a necessary exercise, as with Brian Shields' The Mourning Constitution, where he has the first original thought about wire-tapping I've seen yet.

Brian points out that the government claims it will only tap international calls.

Then he reminds you of the last time you dialed an 800-number for customer service and ended up speaking to Vhopal, India.

After that:

Say you have a situation with John Druglord is in Arizona making a phone call to Joe Drugdealer in Sacremento. They plan on coordinating a distribution of a large number of goods. The feds want to catch these two and make a big drug bust.

Now, if they wanted to, the feds could tell the telecom company to reroute all of John Druglord's phone calls to a server overseas, and re route them back into the US on it's way to Joe Drugdealer's phone. It would take literally milliseconds. On the way back into the country, the feds would have the legal ability to tap the phone conversation between two US citizens that are within the country.


Of course, John Druglord could also be Sally Greenpeace, Bill the John Bircher, or somebody running a 527 who is critical of Barack Obama.

Good thinking, Brian. Now you've depressed me for the rest of the day.

Comments

Anonymous said…
It is also a little known secret that it is even questionable how secure ANY phone call made in the US really is...

I used to work in the telecom business - the following is somewhat simplified, but...

There are two parts to a phone call, the actual connection between the two parties that are talking (what you hear) and the "Out of band" part which is the digital signalling network that (among many other things) tracks billing and "builds" the connection route between the caller and callee.

This out of band network is built with equipment from, and is largely controlled by, a couple of Israeli companies...

Back in the "bad old days" tapping a phone call required making a connection to your line either by climbing a pole somewhere, or connecting down at the local Telco Central Office. With the Out-of-band system, all that is needed is to enter your phone number into the right computer, and your call can be routed as Brian describes, and more importantly, routed to as many additional locations as desired...

Now keep in mind that except for a few highly specialized Gov't / Military networks, ALL phone calls are processed via this network. When a tap order is given, it is handed to the phone co, which essentially sends it to Tel Aviv for processing...

I know of no real protection on the system other than end-user encryption to prevent ANY phone number from being monitored this way, by some other gov't if not ours...

Some of the "911 Truthers" have attempted to include this in their arguments that Israel may have known more than they are admitting to, but I make no comment on it, beyond saying that it's possible.

ART (Who used to work for a different department of one of the companies mentioned...)
Brian Shields said…
Sorry about the depression. If it makes you feel any better, I am uncomfortable having what may be called a passing paranoid delusion become verified as indeed possible.

This type of post is what, hopefully, will be the real direction I bring my blog. Well, not the paranoid depression part, those may be just the side effects.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...