Lawful Hacking: Using Existing Vulnerabilities for Wiretapping on the Internet

Abstract

For years, legal wiretapping was straightforward: the officer doing the intercept connected a tape recorder or the like to a single pair of wires. By the 1990s, however, the changing structure of telecommunications-there was no longer just "Ma Bell" to talk to-and new technologies such as ISDN and cellular telephony made executing a wiretap more complicated for law enforcement. Simple technologies would no longer suffice. In response, Congress passed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) 1 , which mandated a standardized lawful intercept interface on all local phone switches. Since its passage, technology has continued to progress, and in the face of new forms of communication-Skype, voice chat during multiplayer online games, instant messaging, etc.-law enforcement is again experiencing problems. The FBI has called this "Going Dark": their loss of access to suspects' communication. 2 According to news reports, law enforcement wants changes to the wiretap laws to require a CALEA-like interface in Internet software. 3 CALEA, though, has its own issues: it is complex software specifically intended to create a security hole-eavesdropping capability-in the already-complex environment of a phone switch. It has unfortunately made wiretapping easier for everyone, not just law enforcement. Congress failed to heed experts' warnings of the danger posed by this mandated vulnerability, and time has proven the experts right. The so-called "Athens Affair," where someone used the built-in lawful intercept mechanism to listen to the cell phone calls of high Greek officials, including the Prime Minister, 4 is but one example. In an earlier work, we showed why extending CALEA to the Internet would create very serious problems, including the security problems it has visited on the phone system. 5

Forensic analysis of WhatsApp Messenger on Android smartphones

“…Given their popularity, IM services are being increasingly used not only for legitimate activities, but also for illicit ones [20]: criminals may indeed use them either to communicate with potential victims, or with other criminals to escape interception [3]. Therefore, IM applications have the potential of being a very rich source of evidentiary information in most investigations.…”

Remote Surveillance: A Means of Intelligence Gathering for Minimizing Security Challenges in Nigeria

“…The work specifically focused on the Boko Haram insurgency between 2015 to 2018. In another work prepared and presented by [54], the history of the US laws mandating legal wiretap was expatriated. Also, wiretapping concepts and a few of its devices were mentioned.…”

National Security Surveillance in Southern Africa

“…Where vulnerabilities do not exist -for instance when criminals use end-to-end encryption -then lawful interception methods will not be able to analyse the intercepted communications anyway, which requires other methods to be used (such as hacking). This approach may have perverse consequences, such as creating an incentive for the state not to report vulnerabilities, although exploiting a vulnerability and reporting it are not necessarily mutually exclusive, as the agencies can report after exploiting them (Bellovin et al 2014).…”