Feds Can Locate Cell Phones Without Telcos

schwit1 sends along an Ars Technica report covering the release of documents obtained under the FOIA suggesting that the Justice Department may have been evading privacy laws in their use of "triggerfish" technology. Triggerfish are cell-tower spoofing devices that induce cell phones to give up their location and other identifying information, without recourse to any cell carrier. "Courts in recent years have been raising the evidentiary bar law enforcement agents must meet in order to obtain historical cell phone records that reveal information about a target's location. But documents obtained by civil liberties groups under a Freedom of Information Act request suggest that 'triggerfish' technology can be used to pinpoint cell phones without involving cell phone providers at all. The Justice Department's electronic surveillance manual explicitly suggests that triggerfish may be used to avoid restrictions in statutes like CALEA that bar the use of pen register or trap-and-trace devices..." The article does mention that the Patriot Act contains language that should require a court order to deploy triggerfish, whereas prior to 2001 "the statutory language governing pen register or trap-and-trace orders did not appear to cover location tracking technology."

Comments

Re:Privacy is an antiquated notion.

[zippthorne]

Privacy is not explicitly spelled out, though. I mean, there are the ninth and tenth amendments, but they're exactly the kind of thing you'd expect politicians to ignore due to their unambiguous, but unspecific language (and ironically, one of the more prominent "pro-privacy" rulings pretty much ignored the tenth amendment). Whittling at the weapons first, that's what's unexpected.

Re:With the more advanced phones....

[pithen]

Sure, what is the problem with gradually eroding civil liberties and ever increasing surveillance of the populace. Why don't we just throw the Constitution right in the garbage while we're at it?

All in all, its almost as much a problem as this "If you've got nothing to hide, what are you worried about?" attitude that we're seeing more and more.

Re:Why are cell phones so lame?

[John Hasler]

> Why are cell phones designed to be so insecure?

For the same reason bank accounts, Web sites, etc. are. Not more than one user in a million cares.

Re:batteries ftw

[Tiger4]

Some cell phones work INSIDE a closed elevator box. Creating a good shielded enclosure is not a casual thing to do.

The only way to be sure, besides nuking from orbit, would be to seal up the phone, then call it. If it doesn't answer, you have *probably* got it right. But no guarantees.