LAWFUL INTERCEPTION

FOR THE HANDLING OF CRIMES

IN THE AREA OF SERVICE LABFORCAB DENPASAR
1)
AnangKusnadi
1)
Study Program Electrical Engineering, Telecommunication Management, Udayana
University, Denpasar, masanangks@yahoo.com
This paper represents the
lawful Interception (LI) For the
handling of crimes in the area of
Service Labforcab Denpasar. The law
of lnterception is an effective way of
doing communication monitoring
legal activities liquid for law
enforcement in handling a crime for
the purpose of disclosure cases. There
are two aspects to be covered based
on the literature-literature which has
been published in effect of regulatory
aspects and technical aspects. On this
paper will identify the existing
problems in application of lawful
Interception in the area of Forensic
Laboratory Services Branch of
Denpasar and advice on possible
solution.

expected. But like a double-edged

blade in addition to giving the change
has a positive impact, it also has a
negative form of crime that the
excesses of the more sophisticated
and structured in terms of methods
and coverage areas.

I. INTRODUCTION

The
challenge
of
implementing the task of the police
force will certainly be related to
circumstances
and
development
environment. State police of the
Republic of Indonesia, with all the
limitations and infrastructure turns out
to be capable of uncovering cases
cases, one of which the terror
bombing has happened ditanah the
water. As an example of the success
of the bomb case disclosure of the
period 1999 2001 recorded 163
cases of bomb uncovered 104 cases
(70%), the period 2002 2004 going
on 37 cases successfully revealed 42
cases (125%), the success of the
Police in the eyes of the world,
besides the scent international but also
the nation and the country of
Indonesia.

The
advancement
of
technology
in
the
form
of
telecommunication
device
that
brought the era of globalization in the
modern human civilization is

Such success would certainly

not escape the alignment of functions
and roles of forensic experts by
making use of science and technology
that were derived from processing the

Keywords: Crime, LI (Lawful

Interception), LI, technical Regulation
(architecture) Service Area Labforcab
LI, Denpasar.

scene of things (the CRIME SCENE)

by performing the checks and connect
micro evidence (evidence of micro) as
the examination of blood, DNA, fake
documents
and
money,
an
examination of the CRIME SCENE
and evidence of explosive, an
examination of CRIME SCENES and
evidence of digital crimes (computers
and telecommunications) and others.
Forensic Laboratory Denpasar
Branch as one of the last of the
function responsible for forensic
investigation and investigation of
crimes in imiah (Scientific Crime
Investigation) with area of service:
Bali, NTB and NTT is claimed to
improve
technical
capabilities,
facilities and infrastructure. One of
the capabilities that must be
developed from the large number of
requests from Police Unions, namely
the field of Lawful Interception to
find forensic evidence in order the
disclosure of the case of a criminal
offence. Then outside it that makes
writers
interested
in
Lawful
Interception in addition to crimes of
terrorism, many criminal acts that are
generally considered minor such as
fraud "mama ask pulse", premium
sms content, relocation etc which
seemed to have not been addressed,
and according to the author is actually
the above activities constitute acts
that could not be allowed because it
can also cause anxiety in society. And
according to the author of the
application of Lawful Interception can
be a solution when used appropriately.

Crime where the offender uses

means of telecommunication and the
internet to communicate with
someone can be used as an entrance
slit for law enforcement to uncover
the crimes and one way is the
application of Lawful Interception.
Lawful interception plays a major role
for the disclosure of crimes,
particularly in the area of service
Labforcab Denpasar, but still not used
because there are two fundamental
problems, namely with regard to
regulatory aspects of the act as the
legal umbrella that set them up as well
as the technical aspects related to the
presence of a work procedure yet
(SOP) and not to the existence of
adequate instruments of supporting
LI.
2 these aspects is its own
challenges for the implementation of
Lawful Interception for disclosure of
crimes in the area of service Labfor
Denpasar Branch. In this paper will be
discussed about the problems of the
Lawful Interception of the regulatory
aspects and technical aspects that
have been published and discussed the
problem
solving
based
on
comparative literature-literature is
first published.

II.

LAWFUL INTERCEPTION

Lawful
interception
(LI)
means a wiretapping and surveillance
against communication activities
legally on behalf of a government
agency that has the authority

prescribed by the regulations specific

to individuals and groups. In order to
be a legitimate in the eyes of the law
it was LI, the LI must be set through
the correct regulation i.e. based on
rules or legislation, as well as meet
the requirements of the technical
procedures and adequate instruments,
so that both these aspects can
guarantee the validity of digital
forensic evidence when will presented
to the Court.
Lawful
Interception
(LI)
international standard should be either
from a technical or regulatory aspects.
And recommended in almost all
countries that is issued by the
European
Telecommunications
Standards Institute (ETSI) to lawful
interception or guide appropriate
Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act (CALEA).
2.1.
Regulation
Interception.

of

Lawful

Regulation governing Lawful

Interception in Indonesia now is still
the subject of debate, what is
legitimate in the eyes of the law or
not. Lawful Interception in Indonesia
have been used by some law
enforcement and Intelligence agencies
that is: BIN, KPK, BNN and police
with
legal
basis
on
some
laws/regulations.
Laws/rules
governing Lawful interception is:
1.
UU No. 5 of 1997 about
psychotropic drugs.

2. UU No. 22 of 1997 concerning

Narcotics (amended by UU No. 35 of
2009).
3. UU No. 31 of 1999 on the
eradication of Criminal Acts Of
Corruption.
4. UU No. 36 of 1999 regarding
telecommunications.
5. PP No.19 of 2000 about the
unified team The Eradication Of
Criminal Acts Of Corruption
6. PP No. 52 of 2000about the
conduct of the Telecommunication
Services
7. Perpu No. 1 of 2002 about the
eradication of Criminal Acts Of
Terrorism.
8. UU No. 18 Tahun 2003 about the
Advocates
9. Permenkominfo
No. 11 of
2006 about Technically Wiretapping
To Information
10. UU No. 21 of2007 about the
eradication of Criminal Acts Of
Trafficking People
11. Permenkominfo
No.
1 0f
2008
about the recording of
information for the benefit of the
defense and Security of the country.
12. UU No. 11 Tahun 2008 of the
information
and
electronic
transactions.
At the end of February 2011 at
the Constitutional Court (MK) of the
award Number 5/PUU-VIII/2010
have canceled article 31 paragraph 4
of law No. 11 of 2008 Of the
information
and
electronic
transactions (ITE) who set about
wiretapping procedures, namely:

CHAPTER VII the ACT

PROHIBITED article 31
(1) any person intentionally and
without legal rights or against
interception or eavesdropping upon
electronic
information
and/or
electronic documents in a computer
and/or certain electronic systems
belong to someone else.
(2) any person intentionally and
without legal rights or against
interception over the Electronic
transmission of information and/or
electronic documents that cannot be
public from, to, and in a computer
and/or certain electronic systems
belong to others, both of which do not
cause any change or cause any
changes,
omissions,
and/or
termination
of
the
electronic
information
and/or
electronic
document is being transmitted.
(3) unless the interception referred to
in subsection (1) and paragraph (2),
the interception is carried out within
the framework of law enforcement at
the request of police, prosecution,
and/or other law enforcement
institutions are established by law.
(4) further Provisions regarding the
procedures for interception as referred
to in paragraph (3) is set by
government regulations.
The COURT asserted that
wiretapping should be regulated in the
Act (UU), not the rules that are
underneath it like the Government
Regulation (PP) or Ministerial
Regulation (Permen). The COURT

held that there is no raw settings

regarding wiretapping, so possible
irregularities. Also tapping described
is indeed a form of violation of rights
of privacy that are contrary to UUD
1945.
Post debate arose whether the rules of
the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
verdict tapping pretty set with one law
or can spread to various laws?. The
COURT assesses the need for a
special law regulating wiretapping in
General up to the intercepts for each
institution authorities. This legislation
is very necessary because up to now
there is still no settings in sync about
tapping so that potentially harm the
constitutional rights of citizens in
General. So some experts inform
argued for legislation that in the
meaning of the above yet composed
then Lawful Interception evidence in
Indonesia will still be questioned their
validity when used as evidence in
court and its implications will be
considered Lawful Interception is
illegal although used in order to better
enforce the law.
2.2. Telecommunication Technology
Telecommunications
technology has evolved towards a
digital/internet-based
communications. The types of
communication that there is now more
advanced, diverse and widely to reach
out to remote areas that once were
unimaginable.
The
modern
telecommunications network offering
access through a variety of technology
including: PSTN, ISDN, WLAN,
4

WiMAX, GSM, GPRS, UMTS,

CDMA, cable, and other technologies
based on the Internet Protocol (IP).
Voice communication service has
evolved from a fixed network model
(cable), wireless technology such as
cell phones, and Internet-based
technologies such as voice over IP
(VoIP). Data services have also been
developed include video, facsimile
(fax), short message service (SMS), email, image transmission, and others.
Internet-based communication has
now been socialized. almost all
people use chat service, e-mail
service, and communication services
that sound quite cheap other through
various companies and developing
technologies
such
as
Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP). The nature
of the internet allows that new
applications and innovative tools will
continue to evolve in the future. The
Internet has become a hub for human
beings around the world. Rather than
just being a channel for exchanging
data, but now changed into a
multidirectional
communication
channels interactively. Present the
internet used to be labeled online
Department, is now starting to turn
into a social Department.
2.3. The history
Interception.

of

Lawful

A case tapping has existed

around 100 years ago. At the time of
the
early
technology
telecommunication made around 1840
with the use of the telegraph, there is
one example of a case tapping popular

things reported in 1867. At that time a

Wall Street stock broker in
collaboration with Western Union
Telegraph operator to intercepting
sent to a newspaper that existed in the
Middle East. The telegraph message
is then replaced with the false
bankruptcy occurred it was reported
that financial and other disasters that
befall a company alleged to have
bought stocks on the New York Stock
Exchange. With "the role of
information", the speculators buying
stocks that anjok from their victims.
After the wiretapping case
developing into Telephone Tapping on
a telephone cable era and advancing
to the digitization era now. Starting
from telephone tapping in PSTN
(Public Switched Telephone Network)
or telephone connection cable is then
further development on cell phone
tapping by making use of existing
frequencies with posting breakout
encryption
algorithm
of
telecommunications. It is very
possible, given that the frequency of
the telecommunications connection
moves freely in the radiated air cell.
By knowing the frequency range each
operator will be on get encrypted data
traffic from the air. From this data, by
using a certain algorithm may open
access to wiretapping.
2.4.
Technical
(Architectural)
Lawful Interception
Although
the
reference
standards in each country is different
in accordance with the respective
jurisdictions, but in General, the
5

Lawful Interception architecture in

each
country
refers
to
the
international standard, LI architecture
commonly used that is issued by the
European
Telecommunications
Standards Institute (ETSI) to lawful
interception. However, from the study
of literature is known there are several
Lawful Interception architecture
which
is
made
by
several
manufacturers that focus on Lawful
Interception devices namely, 2 of
them are CISCO systems and LIMS
(Lawful
Interception
OfTelecomunication Service). In this
paper only discussed the architecture
of ETSI because from most
manufacturers make LI architecture
based on the architecture of ETSI.
A. Architecture Overview
In this paper, will be
elaborated concerning the Lawful
Interception architecture according to
the document issued by ETSI and is
quoted
in
document
NetportNetworks [4].

Interception requirements model

from ETSI. In the model of ETSI in
General "cloud" or the domain
intercepts can be divided into 3:
1. Network Entities: network or
resources used. As for the related
Network Entities is a Service
Provider or Network service
provider Nerwork. Service Provider
Nerwork aims to provide services of
communication network between 1
party and other parties.Meanwhile,
the Service Provider Nerwork of
Lawful Interception in this case
function puts the position of tappers
in the service provider network so as
not to affect the services available or
communication between items that
are intercepted. This is the task of
the
Network
operator's
Administration Function (or labeled
HI1) as an administrator. IIF
(Internal Intercept Function) is the
internal module for intercepting
internally
within the
Service
Provider. So useful administrator to
handle the request wiretapping from
the LEA.
2. Interception Mediation.

Figure 1 :General Network

ArreangmentforInterception(sumber:ETSI)

In Figure 1. indicated on the flow

pattern of IRI and CC from a cloud
of Public Network of Lawful

In this case the media is inside the

Cloud Public Network. In the Lawful
Interceptionwith 2 main things that
in the sadap namely: Content of
Communication (CC) and the
Intercept Related Information (IRI)
that is contained in the IIF.
a. Content of Communication (CC)
that is the content of the news, in this

case can be either voice, video or

text message (or in short HI2)
b. Intercept Related Information
(IRI), namely the information about
the parties who intercepted. IRI
refers to a signal source and
destination information, call, and
other related (or private labeled
HI2).
3. LEA (Law Enforcement Agency)
is the legal body in yurudis to
conduct wiretapping. In each State,
the definition of LEA hanging from
yuridikasi, respectively, for example
in North America, LEAH is handled
by
CALEA
(Communications
Assistance for Law Enforment Act).
Different case with in Indonesia, as
set forth in rule number 11 of
Kominfo
of/PER/M./02/2006
KOMINFO about Tapping against
the Technical Information revealed
that
the
peyadapan
legally
committed by law enforcement
officials (article 5). LEA has Law
Enforcement Monitoring Facility
(LEMF) who served as network data
storage/server that is in the law
enforcement agencies.
As for the tapping process
involves network service providers
and law enforcement agencies.
Technically, the two aforementioned
cloud connect by Handover Interface
or abbreviated as HI. Hi own
technical functioning of the bridge or
as a liaison between the network that
is used by law enforcement with the
network service provider. The
gateway is also useful guarantee

communications running smoothly

and Leah does not directly interfere
with the business network service
providers.
Meanwhile,
administrators
assigned
to
intercepting internal also constrained
by an interface that is THIS (Internal
Network Interface) are also useful
filtration in order not to interfere
with communications and the
company's business.
B. Base Element
Interception

in

Lawful

figure 2: Lawful Interception functions at a

higher Level (source: ETSI)

Figure 2 describes the functions of

the elements of the Lawful
Interception, where there are 3 basic
elements of Lawful Interception:
1. Internal Intercept Function (IIF).
IIF is on a domain Network and
responsible
for
informationinformation about tapping that is IRI
and CC.
2. Mediation Function (MF). MF
function as intermediaries between
the Public Telecom Network (PTN)
with the LEMF (LEA network).
Communication between PTN with
certain standard LEMF using HI1
HI2 and interfase.

3.
Administration
Function
(ADMF). ADMF plays a role in
servicing
the
request
and
communication intercepts between
the IIF and MF through the Internal
Network Interface (INI).
C. Application of ETSI in Lawful
Interception
In
General,
the
implementation of standards from
ETSI can be described as follows:

2. via secure connection (via secure

connection)
to ensure data security. ADMF such
must be backed up to a certain period
in ensuring existing data from things
that are not desirable. Data backup
kedapal Backup Administration Unit.
ADMF then sends the results to the
MF.
3. MF: is mediation as well as acting
as a function of the introduction to
results obtained from tapping ADMF
and forward it to LEMF. Data from
the MF can be either HI2 HI3 and
namely information on targets
tapped. MF also must be backed up
to a certain period in ensuring the
integrity of the data in case of
something not desirable.
4. LEAH: law enforcement agencies.
LEA ordered data intercepts of
LEMF.

III. DISCUSSION
Figure 3: An Example Of The Architecture
Of The Application Of The Standard ETSI
tentang Lawful Intrception

As has been described in ETSI

above, with regard to the tasks of
each Node in Figure 3:
1. ADMF: provide data traffic
between telecommunications to the
intended target. ADMF order data to
the IIF. While the officers believed to
access everything

The discussion in this paper is the

answer to the question presented in
the chapter I concerning problems in
the
application
of
Lawful
Interception for disclosure of crimes
in the area of service Labfor
Denpasar Branch. The analysis of
these answers the author's auto
summary of references/literature that
authors collect is as follows:
1. Advice related to the regulation,
namely:

For the regulation of Lawful

Interception is indeed much going
debate about the legality of a law
umbrella, but the author argues that
the COURT only cancel article 31
paragraph (4) concerning the
provisions on the procedures for
interception as referred to in
paragraph (3) is set by government
regulations. Explicitly that the rules
about tapping that is not valid is
tapping that is governed by rules
under the ACT. While the intercepts
under Act No. 32/1999 of
telecommunication and law No.
11/2008 about ITE, and law No.
32/1999 of Telecommunication,
article 41 and 42 are still the
Foundation of the legal foundation
of bias about LI.

which
is
the
creation
of
communication without interruption
between the party tapped; do not
interfere with telecommunications
networks; and not interfere with your
business network service providers.
3 Standard) LI is expected referable,
as
other
communication
confidentiality guarantee, while only
the intended parties to intercepted
the
delivered
information.
Organizational
basis
can
be
described as follows:

2. for the technical problems.

a. with regard to the procedure
(SOP)
With regard to the existence of a yet
procedure (SOP), the solution is to
adopt the procedures of ETSI issued,
namely:
1) elements in the LI is divided into
3 namely: IIF, MF and ADMF which
is a function of the internal network
provider
services,
mediation
functions as well as administrative
functions.
2) standard political LITHA is
divided into an open interface that
does not confuse between the
functions of law enforcement
agencies and providers of network
services. This has the advantage of

Figure4: Organizational fow chart

for LawfulInterception

b. Not yet the existence of the

instrument LI
Yet the existence of a
supportive instrument, the solution
will be the filing of procurement to the
leadership. Technical configuration
tools and/or recording devices must
comply with the provisions of
international standards (ETSI and
CALEA) applicable having regard to
the principle of compatibility. As for
the types of equipment that are
required are as follows:

Tools and/or recording device

information includes
a. the device interface (interface)
recording
b. Monitoring Center (monitoring
centre); and
c.
means
infrastructure,
transmission).

of
transmission
liaison
(link

III. CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions that can be drawn
on paper "Lawful Interception (LI)
For the handling of Crimes in the area
of Service Labforcab Denpasar,"
namely that the application of Lawful
Interception is something that is
required for the disclosure of a
criminal case. Regulations and
technical requirements must be met,
namely on the basis of the applicable
LAW and provisions of international
standards (ETSI and CALEA).

APPENDIX
HI2 = Intercept related Information
HI3 = Contents of communication

REFERENCES
[1]
RomanidisEvripidis, Lawful
Interception and Counter Measures In
The Era of Internet Telephony,
Master
of Science
Thesis
Stockholm, Sweden, September, 2008
[2]
Martin Adolph,
Kelly Technical

Dr

Tim

Aspects of Lawful Interception,

ITU-T Technology Watch Report 6,
May 2008. ITU, 7 May 2009.
[3]
Muhammad D Sarwa R
Jahan Morshed, Voice over IP and
Lawful Intercept, Good cop/Bad cop,
Pebruari 2010
[4]
Ultimaco LIMS, Lawful
Interception in the Digital
Age,
Vital Elements of an Effective
Solution, pp. 3-5, September, 2010.
[5] UU No.
36 Tahun
tentangTelekomunikasi.

1999

[6]
Permenkominfo No. 1 Tahun
2008
tentangPerekamanInformasiuntukKep
entinganPertahanandanKeamanan
Negara.
[7]
UU No.11 Tahun 2008
tentangInformasidanTransaksiElektro
nik.

10