1. 1 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Session Number Presentation_ID Lawful Intercept Case Study Harvard Law School November 12, 2003

2. 222 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Outline Brief Summary of the “Case” and Your Role Overview of Relevant Technologies Your Guidance to the Company

3. 333 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Summary In-house counsel for an IP-based network equipment manufacturer Responsible for the company’s legal strategy on lawful intercept Company is looking for guidance (legal, PR, regulatory) regarding the best approach to LI in the post 9/11 world Need to respond to customer requests for information and contractual protection

4. 444 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Traditional Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) Architecture SS7 ………… Central Office Switches Tandem Switches

5. 555 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Voice over IP (VoIP) Voice is carried as a digital signal to an Aggregation Device over a common ‘pipe’ –Information is carried as packets –Resources are shared between data types and other subscribers. –Packets to same address may follow different routes –Eliminates the need for separate networks and infrastructure for different forms of communication (voice, data, video)  Convergence! Information is routed based on its final destination. –Voice and signaling follow separate paths

6. 666 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Typical VoIP Architecture Internet Aggregation Router Customer Premise IAD SS7 Call Control Entity 911 Operator Services Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) IntereXchange Carrier (IXC) PBX Trunking Gateway Trunking Gateway Aggregation Router IAD PBX Core Router IP Switch Internet Gateway Router

7. 777 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID General Questions—1/3 Do we see more similarities or differences among the three country’s approaches to lawful intercept? What might be some reasons for these differences and/or similarities? What are some of the ways that these differences and/or similarities might impact your company’s legal and technical approach?

8. 888 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID General Questions—2/3 What are some of the risks for your company under these laws (e.g. fines, lawsuits)? What steps can and should you take to protect your company from them?

9. 999 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID General Questions—3/3 How should your company engage with relevant government agencies? Actively and openly? Equally across all countries or just the most strident? Should you let your customers do it instead of you? What factors you should consider in making this determination?

10. 10 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID “Managed Services” Scenario Your company has one product that can be used both by private enterprises for their corporate voice network and by public service providers to deliver managed voice services. In the latter case, the product can either sit on the customer’s premise or the on the service provider’s site in their central office. The team developing this product within your company wants to know whether they are “legally required” to build LI functionality into this product, and if not, whether there are some other (non-legal) reasons that they should. What advice do you give them?

11. 11 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Managed Services Scenario Things to consider: 1. Does this qualify as a “public” or “private” network service? Or both? Is the answer the same for all countries? Is this a relevant question in all countries? 2. Is this functionality “legally required” in any country? Is that even a relevant question? If not, what are the risks, if any, of not building this functionality into the product? 3. How would you communicate with your customers on this issue?

12. 12 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Contract Negotiations During negotiations on a sales contract with one of your global service provider customers they demand that you include a guarantee that all of your products are “LI-compliant” on a world-wide basis. They suggest that breach of this guarantee would result in liquidated damages. They also ask you to indemnify them for any penalties they might suffer for non-compliance with a particular country’s LI laws. How would you handle this?

13. 13 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Contract Negotiations Things to Consider: 1. Do you have any legal obligation to make this promise? 2. How do you analyze their request for liquidated damages? What should the amount be, if any? Is money the customer’s “sole remedy”? 3. What about other vendors’ products in the network? Do you have complete control over the network design? 4. What is the “true” risk to your company of a breach? 5. Is there anything you should try to get in return for this promise?

14. 14 © 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Presentation_ID Questions? Feel free to email me at: tehrlich@cisco.com