Slashdot Mirror
FCC Wants to Track Wireless
pin_gween writes "According to an article on ZDNet, the FCC wants the ability to track Wi-fi accessible phones like the ZyXel phone. The FCC's June report talked about several ways of realizing a caller's location: 'creating an "inventory" of every Wi-Fi access point in the United States, engaging in "mapping and triangulation" of those access points, compiling an "access jack inventory" for wired VoIP users, or even mandating that Net phones include GPS.'"
The war on terror has claimed another victim.
Can I just ask one question? WHY? Is tracking wireless really necessary?
This is just yet another attempt to monitor what we're doing and where we are. Who says that the transmitter in the phones would only transmit the location?
"(As a side note, I think it's cowardly for FCC officials to refuse to have their names mentioned, but it was a condition of attending the event.)"
Yeah, if you cant stand in front of a conference type event that you evidently called for, and have the press print you as a source, I think thats seriously pathetic.
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
The article states that there will occur a "mapping and triangulation" of the access points. Triangulation may have worked to sniff out the spies in World War II, but nowadays it's ineffective for one simple reason: the number of branches to and from each node is too high.
I've worked (someone with a job on /.!) with WiFi access points for some time, and we constantly came across this hurdle. It's interesting that as technology develops, the capacity of both surveillance and anonymity increases.
Food for thought.
We (enterprise) have a hard enough job tracking our own and our rogue points. And it's not like users ever want to have a mobile access point for presentations at non-wifi locations.
And what about every laptop that is automagically converted into a wireless bridge/access point with a few clicks?
On top of which, what is it really necessary to track every wap? To "triangulate" a connection they'd still need to trace the origins of a voip call over the IP connection to figure out where the call was made. A wifi access point map doesn't give you much if you haven't got a way of sourcing the call.
If you compare what they're attempting and what they're saying, you'll find two different things.
If they were just trying to locate 911 callers, this could easily be done with a caller-enabled location system. When someone dialed 911, and only when someone dialed 911, it could report the location.
But what they're looking to do is much more. They want a system to enable law enforcers to quickly locate any individual person in the country. In other words, locating 911 callers is just a rather transparent excuse.
Do you know how you can tell that the federal government just wants more power to fuck with the commoners? Look at things like this, the USA PATRIOT Act and like the and tremble. The government talks about homeland security, but the borders are still open, we're still butt buddies with Saudia Arabia (mainly on the receiving end in more ways than one), the government pushes for things that mostly target the general public and the push is always for more and more power while *gasp* not doing anything consistently pro-security with it.
This is a good example of why I vote libertarian in every election. The government doesn't need to be able to track cell phones because it already has the powers it needs to control the influx of terrorists: deportation, border security and wire-tapping regular conversations. If our government cared less about not offending people and more about really using its basic powers first to fight major crime and terrorism, we wouldn't be wasting our time reading about this stuff.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Hopefuly they will just opt for gps and then manufacturers will include a "debug mode" like on almost every dvd player to turn it off. If theres no debug code cutting a few leads and bridging some wires will do the trick for extra anonimity :) Rember if they think they can track you but they cant its even better then if they cant track you at all.
http://www.uwarfare.com the Best Seattle Counterstirke Community
Except it's a false dichotomy.
They want you to believe they need full-time, universal access to your location in order to locate you when you dial 911.
That's obviously false. They only need your location to be reported when you dial 911.
The way it should work:
1) your phone is able to determine its current location at any time
2) if you dial 911, your phone sends along its current location information
It's that simple. The idea that it's a choice between safety and freedom is a lie, and a pretty barefaced one at that.
I did RTFA, but I didn't feel like searching through a PDF for the answer to my question. How do they plan on identifying someone's location in one of these 911 incidents that they are so sure will happen?
To triangulate a broadcast location, don't you need at least 3 reciever stations in the immediate area?
If so, wouldn't that mean that you would already be in a decently populated area (we are taling about calling 911 in public, right?) where someone nearby should be able to find a land line while you are bleeding in the street?
Sounds like maybe 911 shouldn't be available with these phones, or that it should be a known risk in buying one that it may contribute to your death when operators have no idea where you are.
Vol~
If you want to be located when you call 911, maintain a land-line. Where is the goddamn rocket science here, people?
You know what? If you don't have a land-line and you have to call 911 and can't speak...well, maybe you die. It happens. Sucks, but it happens. I hate this society...we've become obsessed with throwing huge wads of cash, effort, and legislation at the stupidest problems. 700,000 people die each year of heart disease; zero people a year die from terrorism. We spend billions on one, not on the other...and when Little Timmy dies because he choked on a marble 'cause mommy wasn't watching him, we get "Timmy's Law" which solves a Darwinism problem.
Please help metamoderate.