Slashdot Mirror
Feds Have Access To Cellphone Tracking On Request
Mike writes "According to a Washington Post article, federal officials are routinely asking and getting courts to order cellphone companies to furnish real-time tracking data on subscribers. The data is used to pinpoint the whereabouts of 'criminal suspects', according to judges and industry lawyers. In some cases, judges have granted the requests without even requiring the government to demonstrate probable cause that a crime is taking place or that the inquiry will yield evidence of a crime 'Privacy advocates fear such a practice may expose average Americans to a new level of government scrutiny of their daily lives. Such requests run counter to the Justice Department's internal recommendation that federal prosecutors seek warrants based on probable cause to obtain precise location data in private areas. The requests and orders are sealed at the government's request, so it is difficult to know how often the orders are issued or denied.'"
...and in unrelated news, Reynolds America Inc. ( http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=RAI ) reported a rise in their stock price following record sales in their aluminium and tin foil divisions.
Another reason I prefer not to own a cell phone. Modern ones all have at least rudimentary location tracking built in. With the way the US Govt. abuses powers it shouldn't have, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that they will try to exploit it so they can track people "in need of public safety"... because we all know how the average American (and yes, I'm an American citizen, so I'm bashing my own country, not yours) will roll over and play dead anytime the Govt. pulls out the safety card. It's pathetic.
I think we have to realize that a surveillance society is an inevitable consequence of surveillance capability. If anything, history should show us that when groups of people are granted powers over other groups, they tend to abuse them (see the "Stanford Prison Experiment" for psychological evidence). Thus, any monitoring, surveillance, or other oppressive capabilities, are likely to be realized. As technology removes the barriers to total surveillance, in terms of both the monitoring itself, as well as information processing, I do not see any option rather than for a total surveillance society to emerge.
Call me paranoid, but I still think that the above is a rational assessment given historical evidence.
...and this was done under the guise of "So 911 can find you!"
Signature applied for, Patent Pending
There is an element of truth to this. The practical effect of this is to spread fear and apprehension among "innocent nobodies" who happen to be paying attention. The myth of government omniscience (and, by extension, omnipotence) is a powerful tool of preemptive social control.
It's like torture. Newsflash: the people who torture know it doesn't really "work" on (i.e., produce valuable information from) the victims. It's a form of state terrorism -- it works best on the rest of us.
Sent from the iPad I found in your car.
Good. It's about time they weed out the criminally stupid.
What moron doesn't know they can buy a throw away cell from Walmarts for cash?
If you're dumb enough to be a crook AND use a traceable (i.e. contracted) cell phone you deserve what you get.
I *just* heard a news story about this a day or so ago- take it seriously!
A car was stolen by three guys, and the guys rammed a police car during the chase.
The police opened fire on the vehicle, killing the driver. They also wounded one of two other guys in the car who bailed and ran off into the night.
Here's the part that made me take notice: The news guy said that by using the cellphone number of the driver, they located and captured the other two guys within 20 minutes... by using location tracking of the fugitive's cellphones.
Considering that a) the driver was dead and b) they didn't know who the other two guys were when they bailed out of the car and took off, 20 minutes seemed awfully fast. But how can you track down a cell phone's location without knowing the number or who the owner is?
This means (obviously) that there must be an easily accessible database tracking both caller history (to find out who you called, or called you) AND those people's current locations. I knew things like this were in place for DHS and the FBI (a lot of bank robbers get caught because they have cell phones on them or in their cars), but that local LE had access to this stuff was a surprise.
That means that you and I, joe geek guy, are already in this thing.
Pretty cool, huh? It's *way* too late for tinfoil.
As a radical drug-dealing terrorist pedophile, I have to disagree.
I feel like privacy issues are incredibly important... and that I'm the only one who feels this way. Well, me and my friends who read slashdot. And the four libertarians I know.
The government only does this stuff because they feel like they can get away with it, that's what kills me.
spacefem.com
A rubber-stamp judge slows things down for no useful purpose. You might as well just let the FBI write their own warrants.
A real judge that does his job will slow things down to make sure only people who really should be under surveillance are put under surveillance.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.