Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Needs Warrant To Track Your Cell's GPS History
MacRonin recommends a press release over at the EFF on their recent court victory affirming that cell phone location data is protected by the Fourth Amendment. Here is the decision (PDF). "In an unprecedented victory for cell phone privacy, a federal court has affirmed that cell phone location information stored by a mobile phone provider is protected by the Fourth Amendment and that the government must obtain a warrant based on probable cause before seizing such records. EFF has successfully argued before other courts that the government needs a warrant before it can track a cell phones location in real-time. However, this is the first known case where a court has found that the government must also obtain a warrant when obtaining stored records about a cell phones location from the mobile phone provider."
Before committing a major crime, give cell phone to a small child as a gift.
TFA suggests that they only need a warrant to obtain this information from the mobile carrier, but in some cases this information is available from the devices themselves. The iPhone is a good example of this - software can easily be installed on the device (kind of like a LoJack) to report back GPS location, and the iPhone itself apparently keeps logs of GPS positioning, based on this book's claims. I would argue that this form of surveillance would be just as loosely managed as police placing GPS transponders on vehicles.
What if someone stole my iPhone 3G and committed a crime? Will I be tracked and punished?
Its analogous to the red light traffic cameras that take photos of those who jump the red light, irrespective of who's driving the car, the owner is fined!
slashdot rocks
It scares me that this is considered an "unprecedented" victory. This looks like a clear-cut example of what the 4th amendment is meant to do. If the government wants access to private data they must have a warrant. Why is that so difficult to understand? It's one of the cornerstones of justice.
Today, it seems like the thinking is that the government can get access to anything they want, unless it is specially protected in some way. That is backwards.
but it's a regional decision only at this point and barely scratches the surface of the civil rights and privacy issues that plague American Citizens today. Smile but don't get happy yet.
since when did the DOJ actually use warrants to get what it wanted?
It's not like law or constitution ever stopped gov't from doing whatever they want.
Hah we lost someone in Boston when we were out at the bar a few months ago and we called up the phone company who told us without verification what street she was on.
Now is a dark, dark hour in US history when a court upholds the Constitution and the words "unprecedented victory" are used in the coverage of the event.
it is just a dollar civil fine w/ no possible penalties (it doesn't go on your record)
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Good news! The bad news is that feds ignore the constitution on a daily basis, so good luck enforcing this ruling. Best not to have a cell phone or anything with RFID chip.
You can tell a lot about a person from ring tones.
And they have profilers...
until they decide to invoke the almighty power of the scroll of patriot act.
.....when the laws of the land can be bypassed entirely, it makes the laws of the land utterly useless.
+9000 armor piercing
+9000 block from attacks
+9000 armor
Because if it's the company, the could still voluntarily give up the info without the need for a warrant.
AND apply for "retroactive immunity" - don't forget THAT part.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Thank you EFF. About time.
Need an automatic screenshot taker? Try here.
All I see is a huge radar target...?
[insert "Old people in Pittsburgh" meme...]
It's only a Federal district court so far, so the Feds can still appeal it if they want. But it's an excellent start.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
i dont need a warrant to track my ex-girlfriends cells gps...
but she needs a warrant to keep me away from her.
they say it is often more relevant then the comment above, all we know is its called the Sig!
Whatever for? That sounds like Police State tactics. Datamine to find your acquaintances so that they can be arrested, too.
a warrent for the government Goon Squad be no more difficult than getting a note from your mother when you were a child going to school...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
In Soviet Russia, Russia attacks you....oh wait!!
If the phone company is keeping record, why shouldn't I have access to all such personal data that they have on me? It may be rather fun to study my travel activity without having to also carry around an additional GPS-enabled device or having to buy a new phone with accessible GPS data. For those days when I'm off the ball and forgot what it was I did yesterday.
In most states, law enforcement can still use a GPS tracking device without needing a warrant.
Work smarter, not harder, with gps tracking
We need a gps proxy architecture. Would be difficult to setup. Im afraid this might require specialized hardware :( any ideas?
Trying to install linux on my microwave, but keep getting a kernel panic...
So the feds can't just pull folks' GPS history willy-nilly, but the Cell providers can track folks history all they like, and do whatever they want with it. Thank goodness our rights are protected..
The language of the fourth amendment isn't ambiguous at all. Anyone who's passed the bar should know damned well that obtaining records from a private party requires a warrant.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
We have a similar thing for being ticketed x times for y violation here, but video tickets, at least here and CO don't go on your abstract. If a cop writes you a Red Light ticket though, you are basically SOL.
I have to say, I am all for it. I make it a priority to stop on yellow. I drive a pretty quick care, and I hate when people make me sit at a green light because they are trying to scoot through a recent red.
Now I just make it a game, and see how close I can come to hitting a red light runner so I can get a new paint job.
Though that would have backfired when a MOTORCYCLIST followed a city bus that ran a red light. Yup, the bus ran the light first, then the motorcycle drafted to it's behind. I was on a bicycle and almost hit the guy.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
If the government is going to frame you... why go through the hastle of actually using real footage.
Because they don't know if they want to frame you yet. We're all anonymous and faceless.. until some tracking trend decides that we'd be a nice scapegoat. You have to show up on somebody's radar for that to happen. Your unusual, slashdot-reading, open-source programming, bookstore-visiting habits might be enough. Don't give them any hooks to go after you. If they can't track it, they won't be interested what it says about you--or what they can make it appear to say about you.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
I drive a pretty quick CAR not care 8')
Also, I am not seriously trying to hit someone, it's my responsibility to go on green "if it is clear."
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
They'll have already remote-activated the microphone, and --if the target is a Person of Interest-- they'd have had also had ground assets in the area looking for a divergence between the target and the target's monitored electronics.
I would not be surprised if nowadays they erect aerosol dispensers (colorless, odorless, visible by satellite or local aerial units...) around the doors of targets to "tag" them when they depart or when guests enter.
If there are multiple ports on the dispenser, targets can be "coded" so they can be followed in the visible and a few other spectra to prevent them from switching clothes and having "body doubles" throw off the surveillance team. And, if the trackers detect multiple spectra signals/shading from a single target it could imply sex between them.
Hell, this kind of thing might have dual uses. Do this to the favorite hotels of politicians, Page hangouts... find out who's having sex with whom... Talk about "smear jobs" coming to the fore...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
This is a good step. But, what about the laws surrounding wireless tracking (i.e., setting up listening stations, scarfing up signals -- cell, wifi, etc -- and tagging them with location information).
My best understanding of the law is that once something is on the airwaves, it's fair game (something wardrivers take advantage of). Since most people have switched to wireless forms of communication, all the traditional protections for wired/fixed storage services do not apply. Thus, "wireless"tapping and wireless location tracking are perfectly legal, as long as the proper equipment is used to attain the data.
Thoughts?
The Constitution hasn't been much of an impediment to date. What's one more court ruling?
nothing more to say about that
Doesn't that work out in the DOJ's favor?
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
So what does this ruling really do for you? Nothing except make you "feel" like you have privacy. If they want to look at your GPS logs they have legal precendence to do so without a warrant, and they now also have a law in writing that keeps it from being criminal.
In Smith v. Maryland (1979), the Supreme Court ruled that lists of telephone numbers from outgoing calls (so called "pen registers") are not constitutionally protected because the telephone subscriber voluntarily discloses that information to the telephone company. Given that precedent, it's a tenable argument (although one rejected by the court in this case) to suggest that GPS logs are also unprotected for the same reason.
a mobile phone provider is protected by the Fourth Amendment and that the government must obtain a warrant based on probable cause before seizing such records.
Sure, assuming that the mobile phone provider WANTS protection.
It seems to me that Verizon is happy to give and/or sell the data it has collected regardless of a warrant.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Police were called to a preschool today when a 5 year old didn't want a nap.
He was charged with resisting a rest. (oblig)
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
That do not have this capability (GPS), several smaller companies still offer these phones.
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
But the government is the only entity that is required to get a court order to obtain that information. Anyone else can just ask for it, or buy it.
Why does the carrier have stored data about your location, to begin with? Is that information useful 10 minutes later? We know that they know what towers you're polling/using, but why log that indefinitely? And even given that, how the hell did the GPS info (stuff that your phone gathered and computed, independently of the carrier's network), ever get out of your phone and into someone else's possession?
What this all suggests is that your carrier is up to no good, and your phone is too.
For some reason, I don't think AT&T is ready to beat down my door with M16A2s because they THINK i'm a drug dealer terrorist anytime soon
Aren't warrants so outmoded these days?
It's covered by the 4th amendment?
That would be great if the 4th amendment meant anything anymore. As long as the government accuses you of being a terrorist, they can ignore your 4th amendment rights (and a whole bunch of other rights).
Zeig heil!
Well that is good to hear BUT I'll bet the MAJOR exclusion is FISA.
Somehow I don't think the feds will obey this.
My cell phone has 'gps' but as far as I can tell it's completely useless.
There is no way, using my cell phone for me to get lattitude, longitude and elevation.
There is a way to 'disable gps except for 911' which I clicked. Presumably this means that if you use your cell to call 911 then they can get your lattitude, longitude and elevation, but I can not. Why would I want other people I call to know my gps? I can't guess. However my wife has a cell phone with a similarly useless GPS feature. I turned on my GPS and called her, and there is apparently no way she could tell what my lattitude, longitude and elevation were either or vice versa. Completely useless!
Maybe they use GPS to automatically adjust the clock on your phone accounting for time zones. Maybe not though. I once saw an 'atomic watch' that did this sold for like $1000 bucks - complete rip off scam.
Anyway FSCK cell phone GPS. I'm going to wrap mine in a piece of grounded tin foil.
Wait a minute.. then how will I get calls?
No, instead I am going to shut off the ringer and duct tape it under the seat of a bus in another city then retrieve it after completing the crime of the century...
Frikken A.
...