Advertisement

Abstract

Lawful Interception of Voice-over-IP communications is technically more challenging than Lawful Interception in the PSTN. Currently, Lawful Interception for Voice-over-IP traffic is being standardised with respect to VoIP service architectures where central entities are on the signalling path, as this is the way VoIP is being deployed today. However, future types of VoIP service architectures may be characterised by a higher degree of decentralisation. In the extreme case, there is no central entity in the network through which signalling will pass.

As an example for such a highly decentralised VoIP system, several proposals have suggested to use a P2P-network for VoIP signalling in conjunction with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), commonly referred to as P2PSIP. This paradigm change to P2P-based signalling has significant implications for authorised interception of communications. In this paper, we analyse the problem of applying Lawful Interception to P2P-based Voice-over-IP systems technically, highlighting the characteristic properties of such an approach and the corresponding implications that complicate Lawful Interception. Further, we inspect potential solutions for implementing Lawful Interception in a P2PSIP system in general and discuss advantages and drawbacks of such solutions.

Keywords

Session Initiation Protocol Target Identity Distribute Hash Table Query Node Enrollment Server 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    American National Standards Institute: Lawfully Authorized Electronic Surveillance (LAES) for Voice over Packet Technologies in Wireline Telecommunications networks, ATIS-1000678.200X (ANS T1.678), Version 2. Draft (proposed)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baset, S.: P2PP prototype implementation, http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~salman/peer/
  3. 3.
    Baumgart, I.: P2PNS: A Secure Distributed Name Service for P2PSIP. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Mobile Peer-to-Peer Computing (MP2P 2008) in conjunction with IEEE PerCom 2008, Hong Kong, China, pp. 480–485 (March 2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellovin, S., Blaze, M., Brickell, E., Brooks, C., Cerf, V., Diffie, W., Landau, S., Peterson, J., Treichler, J.: Security Implications of Applying the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act to Voice over IP, http://www.itaa.org/news/docs/CALEAVOIPreport.pdf
  5. 5.
    Bryan, D.A., Lowekamp, B.B., Jennings, C.: SOSIMPLE: A Serverless, Standards-based, P2P SIP Communication System. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advanced Architectures and Algorithms for Internet Delivery and Applications, Orlando, USA (June 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cable Television Laboratories: PacketCable Electronic Surveillance Specification, PKT-SP-ESP-104-040723 (July 2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Castro, M., Druschel, P., Ganesh, A., Rowstron, A., Wallach, D.S.: Secure routing for structured peer-to-peer overlay networks. In: Proc. of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, Boston, MA. ACM Press, New York (December 2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ETSI: ETSI Lawful Interception Architecture, ETSI TS 102 528 v1.1.1 Lawful Interception (LI), Interception domain Architecture for IP networks, technical specification (November 2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    International Herald Tribune Europe: German minister defends ’Trojan horse’ spy tactic as needed to fight terror, http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/31/europe/EU-GEN-Germany-Trojan-Horses.php
  10. 10.
    Jennings, C., Lowekamp, B., Rescorla, E., Rosenberg, J., Baset, S., Schulzrinne, H.: REsource LOcation And Discovery (RELOAD), internet draft (draft-bryan-p2psip-reload-03) (work in progress) (February 2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P2PSIP Status Pages:Peer-to-Peer Session Initiation Protocol (Active WG), http://tools.ietf.org/wg/p2psip/
  12. 12.
    Rappu, I.: Lawful Interception of VoIP in SIP-based Networks, Project Work, Technical-University Hamburg-Harburg (TUHH) (May 2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., Karp, R., Shenker, S.: A Scalable Content-Addressable Network. In: Proc. of SIGCOMM 2001, San Diego, USA, August 27-31 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., Schooler, E.: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol, RFC 3261 (June 2002), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt
  15. 15.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: Guerraoui, R. (ed.) Middleware 2001, vol. 2218, pp. 329–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seedorf, J.: Security Challenges for P2P-SIP. IEEE Network Special Issue on Securing Voice over IP 20(5), 38–45 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seedorf, J.: Using Cryptographically Generated SIP-URIs to Protect the Integrity of Content in P2P-SIP. In: 3rd Annual VoIP Security Workshop, Berlin, Germany (June 2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seedorf, J., Muus, C.: Availability for DHT-based Overlay Networks with Unidirectional Routing. In: Onieva, J.A., Sauveron, D., Chaumette, S., Gollmann, D., Markantonakis, K. (eds.) WISTP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5019. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Singh, A., Castro, M., Druschel, P., Rowstron, A.: Defending against eclipse attacks on overlay networks. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGOPS European Workshop (September 2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh, K., Schulzrinne, H.: Peer-to-Peer Internet Telephony using SIP. In: Proc. of the international workshop on Network and operating systems support for digital audio and video, Stevenson, Washington, USA, pp. 63–68 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Sharp, C., Baker, F., Foster, B.: Cisco Architecture for Lawful Intercept in IP Networks, RFC 3924 (October 2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Liben-Nowell, D., Karger, D.R., Kaashoek, M.F., Dabek, F., Balakrishnan, H.: Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-Peer Lookup Protocol for Internet Applications. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 11(1) (February 2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhao, B.Y., Huang, L., Stribling, J., Rhea, S.C., Joseph, A.D., Kubiatowicz, J.: Tapestry: A Resilient Global-Scale Overlay for Service Deployment. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 22(1) (January 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Seedorf
    • 1
  1. 1.NEC Laboratories EuropeHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations