|
|
article
page | 1 | 2 | 3 |
the load of next-generation services, it becomes more difficult for operators to retain the necessary data for quick access by law enforcement. This is particularly true when operators do not mediate, charge, or bill for IP data on a usage basis, resulting in a lack of usage information and storage mechanisms.
Smooth Criminals
As service provider networks get smarter and surveillance laws more robust, criminals are also evolving to more effectively fly under the radar. The Internet provides a gateway to anonymity for sophisticated surveillance targets, enabling them to avoid controlled networks and ultimately, detection. These targets can also access many different types of networks with different identities, such as IP address, MAC address, SIP URL, email address, IMSI, and TN. This creates correlation challenges and makes the jobs of both service providers and law enforcement more difficult.
To nail these smarter targets, new tools are needed to ensure that authorities have the same investigative abilities available in the PSTN domain, such as telephone number
|
|
To nail these smarter targets, new tools are needed to ensure that authorities have the same investigative abilities available in the PSTN domain, such as telephone number identity, and associated call records. |
|
Fraudulent and malicious activity will continue to challenge both operators and law enforcement officials. By supporting the evolving complexity and volume of data across next-generation networks, service providers should be prepared to confront new dangers posed by sophisticated, modern targets.
Business as Usual
So now we know why LAES is a positive thing for the public as well as law enforcement; the question is, how can service providers today overcome the obstacles set forth by these regulations while still maintaining business as usual?
Transforming diverse network traffic into a useful record sounds good in theory; in reality, it requires a series of steps, not to
|
|
|
|
identity, and associated call records. This puts even greater pressure on operators with the dramatically increasing volumes of traffic for IP-based services and the lack of usage information and storage mechanisms for IP data.
LAES and other surveillance systems must be sophisticated enough to track this longer-term type and intent of fraud and malice. For example, a terrorist may not actually send a malicious email but instead use a Web-based email system, such as Hotmail, Yahoo, or Google, to write an email and save it as a draft. An individual from another IP address can then open the email draft and read it before deleting it. Such a pattern allows fraudulent organizations to transmit information without an email trail, and thus, service provider networks and surveillance laws are forced to further broaden their parameters and regulations to monitor long-term criminal activity.
|
|
mention supporting technology. Operators must support multiple networks for multiple services, and collect from multiple sources to accurately capture and retain data. To do this, they must quickly track and identify target traffic—easier said than done when executing millions of transactions per day, rolling out new services and providing superior service to each and every subscriber. After all, the main focus is on the bottom line.
Scenario:
There are a number of solutions out there—but what is most important when balancing LAES compliance with a booming business?
Performance, for one thing. Operators should look for high performance volumes and low
article
page | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
|
|
