14 November 2001

From: S
To: intelforum@his.com
Subject: FBI's Carnivore
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:14:32 -0400

A (probably) very complicated question for forum members: How does the FBI's new carnivore program (rapidly pushed through Congress after 9/11)[sic] differ in function or purpose from Echelon and what are the potential implications for civil liberties issues?

-- Intelligence Forum (http://www.intelforum.org)

__________

Cryptome:

Carnivore as publicized intercepts only select Internet communications while Echelon is claimed to intercept all forms of communications. The US government has admitted to operating Carnivore while no official admission of Echelon has ever been made.

The FBI Website has a section which describes Carnivore's operation with diagrams. There is no governmental site which describes Echelon, at least not in overt terms.

The full capabilities of Carnivore have not been publicly disclosed, nor any similar program(s) for which Carnivore may be a diversion. Nor is it clear if Echelon is a disinformation campaign to cloak other programs, but that is likely given that Echelon has been reported in the media for some 14 years and few programs continue to use codenames after such exposure except for disinformative purposes.

The pre-911 (actually pre-enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act) version of Carnivore was claimed by the government to be sharply limited to a relatively small number of targets and had to be specifically authorized by narrowly-tailored court orders. The post-911 Carnivore is claimed to be far more widely targeted and receives covert support from ISPs which are allegedly much more accommodating than previously. (Penalities for ISP refusal to cooperate were increased by USA PATRIOT).

In either case, the dispute about Carnivore relates to its technological capacity to intercept and archive a vast amount of information that was not related to the target, data which was then to be sifted for targetted material as authorized by the court order. Critics were not assured of full compliance by the FBI to not make use of the full intercept.

There is no restriction on claimed intercepts by the Echelon system except to exclude intercepts of "US persons" as more fully described by NSA directive USSID 18. Before enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act, intercepted data could not be shared with US law enforcement  agencies. Now it can.

Similarly, before enactment of USA PATRIOT, US law enforcement could not share material from criminal investigations with US intelligence agencies. Now it can. And this combined investigative and intelligence material can also be shared with other nations.

Critics of USA PATRIOT and subsequent directives issued by the Department of Justice claims that the law has potential to dramatically decrease civil liberties. A parallel is drawn between the alleged broad sweep of Echelon aimed at foreign targets now being aimed at the homeland through Carnivore and other surveillance and intercept programs not named but provided for in USA PATRIOT.

The technologies and procedures for targetting, interception, storing, sorting, decryption and analysis allegedly used by Echelon are the most sophisticated in the world. Those can now be called upon for domestic law enforcement purposes. Carnivore constitutes only one of these technologies, and it is comparatively unsophisticated.

There are many commercial versions of Carnivore readily available for which there are few legal prohibitions against usage. The FBI can now legally do what individuals and corporations have been doing for some time. And individuals, corporations and other nations have access to technologies allegedly used by Echelon if not its full capabilities.

This is not to suggest that there are not classified technologies and programs in use by domestic law enforcement as well as intelligence agencies which are not publicly known, and likely in use by individuals, corporations and other nations. Indeed, it is safe to assume that there are, for that has been the history of surveillance and interception: the most effective programs are learned about years later, if ever, as we see hinted at on Intel Forum by comsec, comint and intelligence practitioners.

To be sure, there is considerable denial and deception, disinformation and propaganda, about surveillance and intercept capabilities. We have seen that surrounding Echelon and Carnivore, and more recently about terrorism, anti-terrorism, counterterrorism and military and humanitarian campaigns in Central Asia and the US homeland. Not much can be done about that most sophisticated of technologies -- lying and deceiving of the enemy and collateral damage to the citizenry.

As argued on Intel Forum, credible lying is too important an intelligence and counterintelligence tool to be ever be foregone by intelligence luminaries, historians, senior officials, unidentified spokespersons.

Carnivore and Echelon are likely official deception. But far from the only only if the psychics in high offices and dark shadows are to be believed.

Know the difference between a psychic and an intelligence analyst? The psychic is paid more and has intimate access to the powerful. That's what public affairs programs were concocted to cloak. Very peculiar operations, intelligence  public affairs. And now commercial outreaches of them are growing like virii. No doubt still providing raw data for many masters.