|
|
article page | 1
| 2 |
One option for this process is to
install hardware for all of these
functions. This is costly (and ,
according to the law, can't be subsidized
by subscribers through a direct surcharge).
The mediation devices alone are an
expense, and one often overlooked
by many who aren't directly affected
by the rigors of CALEA. However,
vendors like SS8 and Verint are likely
enjoying the added business that
such a requirement brings them, as
each unit tends to run around $100,000.
Alternatively,
SPs can use the services of a
|
|
|
Critics of CALEA maintain that allowing
private companies to capture and
analyze data is inappropriate. |
|
The
TTP model is not without
its drawbacks. Critics of
CALEA maintain that allowing
private companies to capture
and analyze data is inappropriate,
and an example of worrisome
privatization of a function
traditionally performed by
the government itself. There
is also the omnipresent concern
that everyone who rents rather
than owns faces: Where does
my money go? Am I making
an investment, or just throwing
my money down a bottomless
pit?
|
|
|
|
|
Trusted Third Party
(TTP) to maintain the hardware
and other aspects of LI capability.
Vendors such as NeuStar, VeriSign,
AcmePacket and the other vendors
featured in this very issue of
Pipeline can handle the monitoring
and mediation at a fraction of
the cost. Furthermore, TTPs are
generally companies with long histories
of monitoring networks for accuracy,
speed, and clarity. To extend a
similar high level and drill-down
capabilities to LI seems like a
natural move.
|
|
Either way, the necessities of CALEA
and other LI measures are fast approaching,
so the smart company is spending
its time figuring out how to make
it all work as soon as possible.
While LI implementation is no 'magic
bullet' against illegal activity,
it's yet another measure meant to
ensure that crime is difficult and
costly. That's an important goal,
even if it means that fighting crime
is just as difficult and (wince)
just as costly.
|
|
|
|
|
