From The InterNet...... ------fwd------- Subject: FBI explains how the Bureau wire tapps without a court order This is from America Online and is an edited chat log for readability. FBI Special Agent Jim Kallstrom admits and explains that the Bureau engages in wire tapping without a court order. Agent Kallstrom explains: "There is a mechanism for emergency authority when peoples lives are in danger. It is important to note this technique is used very sparingly and very surgically to protect the public safety and the national security." 1/18/95 21:01:08 EST Opening "Chat Log 1/18/95 FBI" for recording. OnlineHost : Copyright 1995 Cowles Business Media Welcome to Mobile Office Online's Wednesday night Open Press Conference. Your moderator is executive producer Chuck Ashman. Our guest this evening is Special Agent Jim Kallstrom of the FBI. Our topic tonight is Computer Privacy. A1 CHUCK : Welcome to our regular Wednesday open press conference. Tonight we focus on a topic that won't go away. Business groups are concerned...politicians are concerned....privacy activists are concerned and law enforcement officials are concerned. There seems to be a great deal of misinformation regarding the federal government's position. One of the most knowledgeable people on the front line as this technology experiences its growing pains is Jim Kallstrom, Special Agent of the FBI in New York, a specialist in the field of computer privacy. Welcome and thanks for joining us, Jim. Let's start with an overview...To what degree is the Bureau or any law enforcement agency currently tapping into computer file or transmissions and what is the legal basis as you understand it. FBIGuy : As you know, we do not tap any communications or any files without substantial probable cause of criminality. Brought before a judicial beneficiary and a court order obtained. Under the federal wire tapping law, which is also known as Title III, law enforcement investigates the most serious crime conducted by criminals against the citizens and only uses wire tapping where other investigative techniques are not fully capable of solving the crime or saving a life. We do not go on fishing expeditions or we do not surf through communications looking for things of interest. That is strictly forbidden and itself would be a violation of federal law. A1 CHUCK : But, you can bust a door down when a felony is being committed so can you jump into a computer situation if they are tapping the federal reserve. FBIGuy : That could be true, but only under the rules I talked about earlier. There is a mechanism for emergency authority when peoples lives are in danger. It is important to note this technique is used very sparingly and very surgically to protect the public safety and the national security. A1 CHUCK :Jim, what is the status of the clipper chip debate...it seems to have quieted way down. FBIGuy : Well the clipper chip debate is ongoing and I think it's a very healthy debate for all of us that have a stake in this issue to continue to talk about. I'm encouraged that numerous members of the private sector to include Fortune 500 companies are now actively engaged in the debate and that's good! A1 CHUCK : What kind of criminal cases are federal agents making that involve computer technology these days...that you can talk about. FBIGuy : I'll have to talk generically as most of the cases are in the judicial process But they would generally be in the white collar crime areas, major fraud and a spattering of child pornography type cases. OnlineHost : Let's take a question from our audience. Question : do you monitor modem lines to see who people are calling on their computer? FBIGuy : No. A1 CHUCK : Don't be shy Agent Kallstrom, speak right up. Jim what about the different standards in other countries...different legal systems, different crimes and yet online communications soar over borders like they were invisible.. Do you work with Interpol or other foreign law enforcement agencies in this field? FBIGuy :Yes we do and yes communications do cross the bounds of many countries and to most of law enforcements in the world, this is all new stuff. As we all know, we are at the beginning of this thing we call the "information age", all the normal bureaucracies and law is slow to catch up. Question : what form or how would you present evidence in a case where a violation has occurred, would chat logs or exactly how could you intercept communique on sharing networks? FBIGuy : Like I explained earlier, we can only get a court order against an individual or groups of individuals if we can show a conspiracy and the intercept would be done on a particular telephone line where we had probable cause to believe that communications regarding the illegal conduct would be communicated over. We would minimize out any communications that came over that line that were not associated with the criminality the court order was for. OnlineHost : Here's another question from our audience for Special Agent Jim Kallstrom. Question : Jim: To what extent are Law Enforcement Agencies in United States trained and able to work a computer crime case? As a high level LE Administrator I feel very much in need of greater awareness of the problem and its urgency. FBIGuy : Boy are you right! We are certainly all playing catch-up in this area and law enforcement is no exception. As we all know, most people over 45 don't know how to turn on a computer, So there is an education process that has to take place within the law enforcement communities. We in the FBI have a small number of specialists in this area and by the way, all of you out there, we are in the middle of actively recruiting computer scientists for a special agent position. If you are interested, contact the nearest FBI office for information. A1 CHUCK : and now we are joined by CBS radio news director Ron Kilgore who is in Phoenix at station KFYI...Welcome Ron, I know you have a question for the FBI. Ronkil : It seems that child pornography is rampant on the online services. Do you foresee the possibility of training these services to police their systems better? FBIGuy : I think at some point we as a society are going to have to make some judgments concerning that issue. Should technology just run unfetted wherever it goes? A classic example would be #1, caller id, which raises many issues throughout the country and #2, the introduction of picture phone services, where they have an instances of X rated imagery being sent into households. I think the answer is yes, we are definitely going to need some rules and regulations. Question : FBI, with advances in wireless WANs/LANs and PCMCIA cards, PBX systems etc.? what do you think some of the potential threats to companies and home computers may be within the next 12 to 24 months. FBIGuy : Can he be a little more specific. A1 CHUCK : I think he wants to know about such things as virus epidemics and massive intrusions of privacy by new technology. FBIGuy : I'm not really an expert in that area, but I think it's only logical as these new technologies are in the early stages of use and development, there will be ample opportunity for intruders, criminals and people that just want to screw up the works to have many, many targets of opportunities. Question : The FBI is hiring approx 2000 new agents over the next 3-4 years. Are a large proportion of these new agents to be in computer security? FBIGuy : A fairly high percentage of the agents will be recruited from scientific background. A number of them will find their way into the more technical focused program the bureau manages in the major investigative areas. Ronkil : How accurately do you think the media portray the hacker types who seem to gain a cult-figure status, even when they threaten national security computers? FBIGuy : I think it's a mixed bag. Like most crimes, people that have been victims usually take a more rational approach at reporting the harm to society of criminals such as computer hackers. I think unbalanced they have an over glorified in the harm done and potential harm that could be done has been underplayed. If memory serves me, Phoenix reporting has been quite good in this area. A1 CHUCK : Special Agent Jim Kallstrom (for real) of the FBI is our guest on this edition of Mobile Office Open Press. Conference We will make the interview available for downloading through the Executive Intelligence section of Mobile Office keyword Mobile here on America Online. We are not done with the FBI, yet but I want to remind all of you, tomorrow beginning at 1900 hrs EST, we will cover the mobile outlook show from Atlanta, and discuss new products and services...and we will have some products to giveaway....Jim, when an FBI agent goes out on a case...kidnapping or bombing or whatever is he "packing" a portable...How much technology do you guys use in the field. FBIGuy : A lot of the agents are packing, not only a 9 mm, but also a portable computer. Especially the agents working in the white collar crime area. Question : Are chat logs monitored? FBIGuy : No, they are not. Question : If the clipper chip gives government agencies access to private data, what assurances do the American people have that their data is not being read? What check will there be? FBIGuy : As I explained earlier, law enforcement only intercepts communication with court orders. If one otherwise, it is a major crime and the law enforcement individual would be charged with such. I guess when you come down to it, it's a matter of trust. Even though I can assure you, it's a very strict regimen with plenty of audit trails. It's serious business, but it should be. It's a major tool to protect all of us from terrorists, kidnappers, bombers, child pornographers, etc., etc... Question : Does the CIA monitor the Internet (for illegal International Communications) and when activity is found, pass that info to you? FBIGuy : I can't speak for the CIA, but I would guess the answer is no. Who would possibly have time, even if it were legal. But don't get me wrong, if we had specific information which led to probable cause of a criminal act and that criminality was being communicated over the internet, we could seize it with a court order. Question : How is the influx of ISDN, Phonesmart technology and the public's right to know being balanced in the area of Law Enforcement? FBIGuy : The same legal rules apply now that have applied since the wire tap law was passed in 1968. Those laws haven't changed. Things like ISDN will allow multimedia type communications over phone lines. The question is for us...are those communications part of a criminal conspiracy..for example to blow up the World Trade Center or are they not. We have no interest whatsoever in the communications of law abiding citizens and we do not sift through communications looking for criminality. We have to be focused on a particular individual through other investigative means. OnlineHost : We have a question from Wired Magazine. Question : What constitutes "probable cause" in deciding whether or not to get access to a phone line? FBIGuy : Probable cause is a proprondurance of information (evidence) that a criminal act is taking place and that certain people are involved in this criminality. That information is brought before a judge, who makes an independent determination that it is substantial enough to allow law enforcement to violate in this case the criminal's right to privacy. A1 CHUCK : Thanks Jim for joining us after a long day. Without sounding corny and my colleague Ron Kilgore of CBS joins me in this, it is a good thing for the bureau and for the country to have you' available like this to the public....It is about time that agents like yourself get both the recognition and appreciation of what goes into your job in the nineties....thanks again. Tremendous. 1/18/95 21:55:44 EST Closing Log file.