Analysis of wiretap stats

22
The State of Surveillance Christopher Soghoian Center for Cybersecurity Research Indiana University

Transcript of Analysis of wiretap stats

Page 1: Analysis of wiretap stats

The State of Surveillance

Christopher SoghoianCenter for Cybersecurity Research

Indiana University

Page 2: Analysis of wiretap stats

The state of surveillance(law enforcement)

Page 3: Analysis of wiretap stats

Wiretaps in the US

• Real-time interception of communications content.

• Includes– Voice communications– Text messages / IM– Network traffic (think: tcpdump)

• To get one, law enforcement must get a “super warrant”: probable cause +

Page 4: Analysis of wiretap stats

The use of real-time, content intercepts (“wiretaps”) in the US continues to grow each year

Page 5: Analysis of wiretap stats

'87'88'89'90'91'92'93'94'95'96'97'98'99'00'01'02'03'04'05'06'07'08'090

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Intercept orders granted between 1987 and 2009

Total intercepts authorized Federal intercepts authorized

Page 6: Analysis of wiretap stats

Drugs are bad

(If you value your privacy)

Page 7: Analysis of wiretap stats

'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '090

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Major offense specified in intercept order:Narcotics vs all other crimes

Narcotics All other crimes

Page 8: Analysis of wiretap stats

If you are going to break the law, and don’t want to be wiretapped, stick with something safer…

Page 9: Analysis of wiretap stats

Like murder, bribery, or extortion

Page 10: Analysis of wiretap stats

Major offense specified in intercept orders (2009)

Arson, explosives, and weapons 18Bribery 2Extortion (includes usury and loan-sharking) 3Gambling 35Homicide and assault 82Larceny and theft 35Narcotics 2,046Robbery and burglary 9Racketeering 61Other or unspecified 85   Total 2376

Page 11: Analysis of wiretap stats

Phone surveillance increases each year, while other forms all decline

(due to more intercepts by states,not the federal government)

Page 12: Analysis of wiretap stats

'97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '090

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Types of intercept orders(1997 - 2009)

Total Phone Intercept Orders Federal Phone Intercept OrdersTotal Electronic Intercept Orders Federal Electronic Intercept OrdersTotal Combined Intercept Orders Federal Combined Intercept Orders

Page 13: Analysis of wiretap stats

In 2009, 95% of all intercept orders were for a portable device

Page 14: Analysis of wiretap stats

'00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '090

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Location of authorized intercept orders(2000 - 2009)

Personal residence Business Portable device

Page 15: Analysis of wiretap stats

Electronic intercept orders used to be significant in number…..

Page 16: Analysis of wiretap stats

'97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '090

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Electronic and Combined Intercept Orders(1997 - 2009)

Total Electronic Intercept Orders Federal Electronic Intercept OrdersTotal Combined Intercept Orders Federal Combined Intercept Orders

Page 17: Analysis of wiretap stats

But have plunged over the past few years….

Page 18: Analysis of wiretap stats

To less than 5 per year.

Page 19: Analysis of wiretap stats

'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '090

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Electronic Intercept Orders(2004 - 2009)

Total Electronic Intercept Orders Federal Electronic Intercept Orders

Page 20: Analysis of wiretap stats

What happened?

Page 21: Analysis of wiretap stats
Page 22: Analysis of wiretap stats

Network Wiretaps?

• Law enforcement agencies are simply not performing real-time data network intercepts of communications content.

• These stats do not cover FISA / intel agencies, who almost certainly are.

• Law enforcement are instead relying on access to stored communications (cheaper, easier, etc).

• Why tap your ISP in real-time when your email provider will readily give up the files later?