In the case of Carnivore, all installations have been performed by the same small team. Case agents are motivated to solve or prevent crimes, but technically trained agents are motivated by FBI policy and procedures to ensure that collection adheres strictly to court orders and will be admissible in court as evidence. In other words, the Bureau's geeks are going to provide the primary fail-safe against abuse, motivated by their natural civic piety and concerns that the collection of excess information would jeopardise a prosecution. So if the Feds were to over-collect using Carnivore, and use what they learned in the course of a prosecution, the data gathered would not automatically be thrown out as tainted evidence. Another serious deficiency in Carnivore's privacy protection is the lack of any auditing mechanism for supervisors to check up on the actions of field agents.
All users are logged in as 'administrator' and no audit trail of actions is maintained.
So this gives the Feds total deniability in cases where over-collection might be proven. Not only is the over-collected data useful as evidence against the victim, there is no way to determine who in the FBI is guilty of violating his rights. Very slick, and not at all nice. A true Janet Reno production in all aspects. If you want daily updates on news, enter your email address below, then click the 'Join List' button.