Federal Peephole
Colleges ordered to update networks

By Cara Latham

The federal government wants universities around the country to spend billions of dollars to install technology that will help law enforcement officials wiretap anyone using the Internet from a university workstation.

Colleges are vigorously opposing the idea, mostly because of the price tag rather than the invasion of privacy. Rider cannot yet estimate the cost of the wire-tapping technology, but it could be considerable, said Carol Kondrach, associate vice president for Information Technology at the Office of Information Technology (OIT).

“For Rider, 80 to 90 percent of our network is fairly up-to-date, but we have no idea whether or not we’ll be able to meet the standards of the federal government for this wiretapping,” she said. “We may have to rip the whole thing apart and buy new. The last time we did it, it was half a million dollars, and that was just to do a piece of it.”

The cost of upgrading the network could dig deeper into students’ pockets, as it may cause a rise in tuition.

“Every institution is going to feel the pain, and in turn, every student will probably feel the pain if we end up having to do this, unless they offer grants or loans,” Kondrach said. “Or maybe the government will give us money to do it.”

“I don’t think I can afford having tuition go up, being that Rider is one of the more expensive schools in New Jersey,” said sophomore multimedia major Bryan Arenas, who is also an OIT worker. “I think [the government] is going a little too far now.”

On Sept. 23, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) extended the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which originally required providers or commercial voice services to engineer their networks in a way that would assist law enforcement agencies in executing wiretap orders.

The 1994 act specifically exempted the Internet from its regulations, but the FCC has now extended CALEA compliance to include “facilities-based Internet service providers,” which includes the Internet networks at universities like Rider, K-12 schools, libraries and interconnected voice over Internet protocol (VoIP). A private network is now defined as a network that does not have the capacity to interconnect with the public Internet. Universities are seeking an exemption.

Internal networks at universities, which carry documents between servers and workstations, are not subject to CALEA compliance, but the way these internal networks are connected to the Internet is, said Mark Wigfield, press contact for the FCC Wireline Competition Bureau, in a phone interview.

“[The word] ‘facilities’ refers to the way these internal networks are connected to the Internet, which has high capacity data on it,” said Wigfield. “So that would be, in telecom jargon, like a big fat line that can carry tons of data from the whole university system to the Internet and back and forth. So, that in particular would have to be CALEA-compliant.”

Kondrach said the Rider network would be subject to the regulation. “We’re considered by definition to be an Internet service provider because we serve our own Internet service,” she said. “We have our own firewalls and our own connection to the Internet. We have our own rules and policies about the network, so [the FCC] views us as an Internet service provider.”

The new FCC CALEA ruling went into effect when it was published in the Federal Register. Now, the institutions will have 18 months to comply with the order, unless it is successfully challenged by lawsuits or if groups that have opposed the order reach an agreement with the Department of Justice for an exemption by the FCC.

The order has caused uproar, as many groups filed comments opposing the new regulations set forth by the FCC, and argued that CALEA does not cover Internet access.

Groups like EDUCAUSE, a nonprofit association who says its mission is to advance higher education by promoting the intelligent use of information technology, have asked for an exemption from CALEA. The group argues that “it is not in the public interest to require that every college, school, and library redesign their networks just in case a lawful request for surveillance may arise in the future.”

The group also asserts, “requiring full compliance with the proposed new rules would impose an unreasonable financial burden, increasing the costs of education and impacting innovation, with no guarantee for better security for our nation.”

The other issue that concerns organizations is the fact that innovation would be hindered.
Kondrach, who said that Rider is an active member of EDUCAUSE, emphasized this point by saying that a lot of creativity occurs on the Internet.

“If we’re required to maintain these standards so that they can do this, it’s going to be a lot of overhead on our network, and some of the newer technologies won’t be able to be used because we’re going to be bound by this law,” she said. “This is just a small step toward more regulation of the Internet.”

David McGuire, director of communications for the Center for Democracy and Technology, said that it’s best for the government not to tell technologists and universities and others who are in charge of dealing with technology how to develop their products.

“A lot of technology is dependent on this lightly regulated climate in which people can sort of create these wonderful pieces of technology,” said McGuire. “Imposing this government mandate is the opposite of this design process. We think it’s really dangerous to innovation.”

According to the language in the new ruling, the FCC has not reached any conclusions in its CALEA order on whether an exemption might be warranted, and that more information is necessary before making a final decision. Currently, organizations have until Nov. 14 to file comments regarding the Order, after which the FCC will begin to contemplate a decision.

Most groups have not found issues with the order regarding privacy, since the government already can go through a lot of information with a court order. The Electronic Freedom Foundation, however, says on its website that “the privacy of innocent people is likely to be violated.”

Wigfield, of the FCC, confirmed that the order has nothing to do with the PATRIOT Act or terrorism. Still, many groups are continuing to voice their opposition.

“We don’t disagree with the notion that the government has a right and a need, in some cases, to get wiretap information,” said McGuire. “But we just don’t think that the way to solve that problem is to force technology makers or the people who oversee technology into putting design changes into their technology, because what frightens us most is that it’s the sort of thing that will stifle the incredible growth that we’ve seen in the Internet.”

The FCC contends that all this advancement in technology since 1994 is what “presents challenges to executing authorized electronic surveillance” and requires the new standards, according to a written statement by FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin.

Many groups say that they haven’t seen a problem that would be detrimental to law enforcement’s ability to retrieve information.

“Technology companies, Internet companies, have worked very closely with law enforcement when they’ve been served court orders, and have provided information,” said McGuire. “There’s not been a showing by the government of any sort of substance that they’re having difficulty in getting this information, which they purport to need.”

In addition, according to statistics on the EDUCAUSE website, an informal survey of 700 of its member campuses found no reports of wiretap orders being served in 2003.

“If the government were to come to us today to ask, based on a subpoena, to do this sort of business, there are ways they could accomplish [it],” said Kondrach.

In addition to the problems the order poses for tuition costs and innovation, Kondrach said it would affect Rider and its students on a more personal level.

“I’ve got a lot of projects on my schedule for [enhancing] our ability to serve students, and if we’ve got to redirect our attention to this, then lots of those things have to slow down,” she said. “So, everybody loses as far as I’m concerned.”