Slashdot Mirror


Your Cell Records For Sale Online, Cheap

AviN456 writes "The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that your phone records are for sale online to the general public. From the article 'The Chicago Police Department is warning officers their cell phone records are available to anyone -- for a price. Dozens of online services are selling lists of cell phone calls, raising security concerns among law enforcement and privacy experts.' One of these sites is selling cell phone records for $110 for a month's worth of calls. No court order needed, no credentials required. If they want your records and have the money, they get 'em."

12 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. Why pay? by Crilen007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sure its on Google for free somewhere.

  2. Re:Oh no!! by AllInOne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I love how in the article they present the case of FBI agents being snooped on.

    As if it's ok to snoop on regular people but you go too far snooping on FBI agents!

  3. Re:Oh no!! by scheming+daemons · · Score: 4, Insightful
    don't I have a civil right to keep my phone records private or something?

    Your post is a troll, to be sure... but yes. You do have such a civil right. It's called the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. it reads:

    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    The Supreme Court, on several occasions, has read that to be an implicit Right to Privacy.

    Just because the current administation (and to be fair, many past administrations) has wiped their collective asses with the 4th Amendment doesn't mean that it no longer applies.

    My cell phone calls are my personal effects.

    This has nothing to do with Bush... this time. But it again shows the erosion of our personal liberties. And your flippant response notwithstanding, you're going to regret it one day when you wake up and wonder why you can't do or say the things you used to be able to do and say in this "free country".

    It didn't start under Bush.. but it's not being rolled back by the current crowd in Washington either. Neither Democrats nor Republicans, with the very notable exception of Russ Feingold, are fighting for our freedoms anymore.

    --
    "I have as much authority as the pope, I just
    don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin

  4. Re:Oh no!! by DarkIye · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A bit of a controversial issue, that. Most people (the government included) will see only the fact that an FBI agent's been snooped on, and that something important's gone awry. Of course, people won't often ascribe the same situation to themselves. The thing I think's a bit poor is that people don't really care if they're being swindled or not, unless somebody says "This is happening to you, and it's bad". A bit like terrorism in America - it's been going on around the world for years, but it's only when it comes to the hearth and home and the government starts telling people it's bad that people start to have any feelings about it.

    I'm not trying to call names here, but that's sort of how a salesman works - he gives you a problem you don't usually think about, then says "This thing will solve your problem". Never thought of it like that before.

  5. The underlying problem by Schezar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once news of this hits the mainstream television media, I imagine the public outcry and following legislation will put the kaibosh on it.

    Still, the underlying problem is far deeper than many will admit. I believe that we in the United States have a certain right to an expectation of privacy, but at the same time we cannot rely on that expectation to safeguard information regarding ourselves. Information exists beyond the scope of your personal effects, and you cannot reasonably expect others to protect it for you.

    The problem is that most financial and personal transactions here rely almost entirely on security through obscurity: the identity thief can't steal your identity... until he gets ahold of your (trivial to obtain) SSN, and so forth. We rely on hiding information about ourselves as a means of securing our effects, despite the fact that such information is all but unprotectable in the face of modern technology.

    No amount of legislation is going to stop people from uncovering information: the only way to mitigate this is to make the information on its own worthless.

    A social security number should be useless to anyone but me. Same with a bank account number. The security needs to be seperate from the identification.

    --
    GeekNights!
    Late Night Radio for Geeks!
  6. Re:Of course by skiflyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well that's a very true statement... I think what I found disturbing about the article is how low the right price was, and how easy it was to approach the seller, and the lack of recourse for the individual.

    It would be another matter entirely if getting caught using the service involved jail time or whatnot.

  7. Re:Oh no!! by Vesperi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, your phone records are your providors business records. They can do with them what they want. Go read your TOS.

    --
    "Linux is not our destination, it is simply the open road to tommorow"
  8. Re:Oh no!! by mooingyak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference between you or me and an undercover FBI agent being snooped on is that there's a decent chance the snooping will get the FBI agent killed.

    That doesn't mean it's not a problem for everybody, just that it's a REALLY BIG problem for undercover agents.

    --
    William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
  9. If they are doing nothing wrong ..... by cyberscan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they are doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to worry about. Isn't that the tired old argument the governments give the people? It also applies to the police, politicians, judges, corporate officer, and any other official. I have long stated that every bit of information on these folks should be publically posted where anyone can have ready access to it. This information should incluse all licence numbers, SSN's, medical information, and so on. This is what they do to us so it should also be done to them.

  10. Re:Of course by nizo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Ernie Rizzo, a Chicago private investigator, said he uses a similar cell phone record service to conduct research for his clients. On Friday, for instance, Rizzo said he ordered the cell phone records of a suburban police chief whose wife suspects he is cheating on her.

    I wonder how Ernie would feel if someone purchased his phone records and found out who his client is? Since he is aware that phone records are for sale, isn't his statement the same thing as releasing his client's name and identifying her husband? If that is the case, it seems like she (or her husband) could sue the living daylights out of him.

  11. Re:Caution for everyone, not just cops by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Just think: you're a gang leader and suspect that someone in your organization is a narc. You have all of their cell phone numbers, because that's how you communicate, so you call up Locatecell and get the logs. The one who has the local PD in their logs gets a pair of cement shoes for Christmas.

    Sucks for the cop. If only there was some way he could have *two* cell phones: one for gang business and one for personal/police use...

    --
    Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
  12. Re:Old news, new info. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How's Gitmo Orange look on 'ya?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)