Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

wiki.mikrotik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#41

Post by Terry_Roll »

So they can watch everything that you do and then punish you if you look on the wrong parts of the internet instead of blocking the wrongs parts of the internet and tackling the root of the problem in the first place.

That process says more about the people in power than the people using the internet especially when you see how leading search engines can be with their results, its like they want you to fail in order to consolidate their top tier position in society, intellectual feudalism.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#43

Post by medo-bear »

jaywalk wrote: post #40
medo-bear wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

im taking the liberty to talk figuratively. but yeah the thing you own instead of calling the cops will by design and purpose snitch on you when they come knocking

How so? Unless you own a router with CALEA capabilities and specifically configure it to log all of your data, it's not going to snitch on you.

> router with CALEA capabilities and specifically configure it to log all of your data

the point is that in the US this [the device you own snitching on you] is required by law

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_fo...

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#44

Post by hedora »

ncphil wrote: post #9
windexh8er wrote: post #3

Not sure why this is on the front page, but to clarify it's required by the FCC [0] for carriers. Microtik, just like every other network vendor, has this in their product (port mirroring for law enforcement) so that they can check the box. CALEA has been around since the 90s [1]. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/public-safety-and-homeland-security/poli... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_...

Specifically, _1994_, another banner year for undermining civil liberties and privacy, what with the passage of the new sentencing provisions of the federal crime bill and continuing effort to prevent wider use of encryption by individuals through action against PGP: all by a "liberal" US administration that would also accelerate consolidation of mass media in the hands of a few big corporations.

Media consolidation was bipartisan.

Regan rolled back enforcement of many rules, and the rules were changed to exand Clear Channel's (and other) monopolies under W.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#45

Post by tjohns »

tomrod wrote: post #35

I see now why my cybersecurity friends source router hardware that allows them own the OS. Is there any way to not have a backdoor built into my router?

To be clear, this is not a "backdoor" in the traditional sense. Nobody can log into your router without your consent.

This is a way for the router administrator (you) to manually give the police access to a copy of traffic in response to a warrant. The assumption here is that this router is being run at an ISP, and you're a netadmin responsible for handling legal compliance requests.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#46

Post by bombcar »

djanogo wrote: post #17

Might be dumb question, but won't this configuration need admin ssh access to add required rules and local server to log that traffic?

The whole point of the law was to add the ability to tap in, which is what this is. You still need someone to log into the router and setup the account which can do the tap, it can't be remotely activated by spooks.

Though if there are other remote access vulnerabilities, someone may be able to use the feature maliciously once they're in.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#47

Post by ibejoeb »

windexh8er wrote: post #3

Not sure why this is on the front page, but to clarify it's required by the FCC [0] for carriers. Microtik, just like every other network vendor, has this in their product (port mirroring for law enforcement) so that they can check the box. CALEA has been around since the 90s [1]. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/public-safety-and-homeland-security/poli... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_...

Doesn't hurt to hit the front page occasionally. I'll bet someone is learning about CALEA for the first time from this post.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#48

Post by vetinari »

qwertox wrote: post #21
djanogo wrote: post #17

Might be dumb question, but won't this configuration need admin ssh access to add required rules and local server to log that traffic?

Not admin access: > Calea provided options are available only for specific RouterOS user, as Calea server configuration as "tap" configuration. Specific user should have 'sniff' policy enabled at RouterOS user configuration So the admin has to set up a user account on the device.

On RouterOS, the default 'admin' user is a member of the 'full' group, which has 'sniff' policy enabled.

So it can be both - dedicated user with the appropriate permission, or admin himself.

Re: RouterOS – Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (2012)

#50

Post by Krasnol »

ibejoeb wrote: post #47
windexh8er wrote: post #3

Not sure why this is on the front page, but to clarify it's required by the FCC [0] for carriers. Microtik, just like every other network vendor, has this in their product (port mirroring for law enforcement) so that they can check the box. CALEA has been around since the 90s [1]. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/public-safety-and-homeland-security/poli... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_...

Doesn't hurt to hit the front page occasionally. I'll bet someone is learning about CALEA for the first time from this post.

Exactly.

I just learned bout it for the first time.

Post reply on HN