Reply From: "Colman, Clem" <Clem.Colman@dva.gov.au>
>part in this encroachment of privacy into the lives of the people of the
>world by collecting virtually all fax transmissions, e-mails, and phone
>calls. Not even cellular phone calls escape the grasp of the Echelon
>system.
Whilst it may be possible, with particularly sensitive antennae etc to
detect communications over wireless connections from a long range one
really does wonder how this is 'sposed to work with communications which
never leave the wire such as normal domestic phone calls which typically
go copper-fibre-copper.
This leads to the conclusion that the author seriously expects us to
believe that telecommunications companies have either:
-Allowed Echelon physical access to every switch (it was *all* calls
after all) in their network; or
-Redirect a copy of *all* data to these "Agencies" in real time through
their switch network. I'd like to know what kind of bandwidth that
means. For the Australian facility, which must be hidden out in the
desert somewhere basically we need to take the size of every fibre trunk
in Australia and send a link from that location of the same size to the
top secret facility.
As a thought experiment it is worth entertaining the idea that it may be
possible, at close range to determine what is travelling through fibre by
latent RF transmissions given of by the fibre. However, I would tend to
think this doesn't happen with light through glass. Needless to say that
getting any particular conversation, when multiplexed with hundreds of
thousands of others, would be difficult.
Even if it could be done the *bad people* would need to sit almost on top
of the fibre anyway, otherwise it would quickly be lost in background
radiation.
>"Obviously, we need to have these capabilities," said Wayne Madsen
I sincerely doubt you have them, at least to the level represented in
this article.
>As an example of our country's need for the system, Madsen said, "No one
>can argue about using the system to counter terrorism. Where people will
>have a problem is where Echelon is used for political and business
>interests."
I can, but I'm not an American, hence a non person.
>The Echelon system gets most of its data by collecting all transmissions
>handled by the Intelsat and Inmarsat satellites, which are responsible for
>much of the electronic communication that takes place between countries.
Yes, this is possible but the transmissions are directed I believe, hence
the spy satellites would have to shadow the real satellites to have a
reasonable chance of intercept.
>Earth-bound communication is sucked up and absorbed by other spy
>satellites that the NSA has launched into space.
Sucked up, what like a sponge?
>"It's a huge vacuum cleaner," said Madsen.
Oh, like a vacuum cleaner. Of course, a vacuum cleaner would work, a
sponge wouldn't. Silly me.
>Once these spy facilities collect the phone calls, e-mails, and faxes, of
>virtually everyone on earth, the Echelon system sorts them through a kind
>of filter system known as the Echelon dictionary.
Is all the information sent to a central data centre for processing or
done in a distributed manner. I'm just wondering as it will help me
understand in how many places we need to completely double the
telecommunications capacity.
I think well intentioned journalists can do the privacy cause a great deal
of disservice by purporting the abilities of intelligence agencies as
larger than life. By dealing in lies, half truths and assumptions they
bring themselves down to the level of Big Brother.
Regards,
Clem.
-o-
Subscribe: mail majordomo@repsec.com with "subscribe isn".
Today's ISN Sponsor: Repent Security Incorporated [www.repsec.com]
Received on Wed Nov 18 14:57:32 1998