We have built such. -jiri
At 12:35 AM 3/4/2005, Java Rockx wrote:
Jiri,
Do you think ser will eventually acquire wiretapping capabilities?
Regards, Paul
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 17:18:32 -0500, Terry Mac Millan serweb@finian.net wrote:
If the modified RTP and non-modified RTP modules are on the same machine and most regular calls are already making use of the RTP, then the IP's shouldn't change at all. So the parties involved in the tapping will still see the same IP address at the providers end, which shouldn't give it away if they are being tapped.
It would be nice to ignore, but when the authorities come to the front desk with orders to tap and collect, there needs to be a means to do that so that you don't end up getting slapped with an Obstruct justice charge. So there does need to be a method available, or work around, to impliment to comply with the orders.
Terry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jiri Kuthan" jiri@iptel.org To: "Java Rockx" javarockx@gmail.com; ser@cannes.f9.co.uk Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 4:01 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] RTP Wiretapping
The challenge with this approach is how you make intercepted calls non-distinguishable from regular calls. The intercepted party may watch signaling and notice service provider's IP addresses. Also, the quality may degrade through use of RTP relay.
A possible option is to ingore this problem.
Other option would be to implement interception in edge routers. Obviously, it is not an easy one.
-jiri
At 01:16 PM 3/2/2005, Java Rockx wrote:
I was thinking about having a group called "spy" in the grp table and anyone with this ACL would be sent to a modified mediaproxy that would capture the RTP.
User that don't have the "spy" ACL would be handled normally and if NAT traversal is needed then use an unmodified media proxy.
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 08:00:24 -0000, Chris ser@cannes.f9.co.uk wrote:
Why not use a from/to etc detection in .cfg (using database...) to trigger a remote proxy through the requesting agency They then have the capture issue and you have no monitor or delivery issues? Might require conditions of their placement of a proxy? (but is their problem) Regards Chris
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Java Rockx Sent: 26 February 2005 14:29 To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] RTP Wiretapping
Hi All.
I'm located in the US and would like to comply with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) that Congress passed which basically says that VoIP providers should have the ability to wiretap conversations for the FBI upon request.
I use mediaproxy for NAT traversal. So my question is how can I be CALEA compliant? I assume I should be able to modify mediaproxy to write RTP streams to disk, but I'm unclear on how to "mix" both sides of the conversation.
Can anyone help with a suggestion?
Regards, Paul
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.0 - Release Date: 25/02/2005
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.2 - Release Date: 28/02/2005
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/