At Subsentio, Safe Harbor is not just a provision within the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA), it is our business philosophy. Our mission is to provide a safe environment for service providers, their subscribers and law enforcement should a need for electronic surveillance arise. The Safe Harbor provision states that if a telecommunications carrier complies with a publicly available CALEA technical standard adopted by an industry association or standard-setting organization the carrier “shall be found in compliance” with CALEA’s technical capability requirements and in Safe Harbor.
This level of trust to provide a Safe Harbor can only be delivered by personnel with decades of experience. The Subsentio Security Department is staffed with former and retired FBI personnel with years of process and technical experience in the lawful intercept field. Our skilled Government Affairs staff reviews each Court Order for lawful intercept to ensure accuracy and legality. Combined with new and innovative technical solutions utilizing the latest industry accepted standards, Subsentio provides fast and cost efficient compliance capabilities.
Subsentio is a service bureau whose technical solutions connect a lawful intercept to designated Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement monitoring centers to comply with lawfully authorized electronic surveillance (LAES) court orders. From national carriers to small rural providers, Subsentio is responsible for millions of subscribers with a wide range of communication services. These services are often complex, multi-vendor environments encompassing differing phases of technological approaches that require our expertise to properly perform a lawful intercept.
Since inception, CALEA has been one of the least understood and most contentious pieces of legislation Congress has ever imposed on the telecommunications industry. The intent of the Act was to “…make clear a telecommunications carrier’s duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for law enforcement purposes…” while protecting the individual’s right to privacy. Everyone has been arguing about its meaning, costs, standards, and even Congressional authority to impose the Act, ever since.