Slashdot Mirror
Obama's Mobile Phone Records Compromised, Shared
Tiger4 writes "Verizon has confirmed that some of its employees have accessed and perhaps shared calling records of President Elect Barack Obama (coverage at CNN, Reuters, AP). Verizon says the people involved have all been put on leave with pay as the investigation proceeds. Some of the employees may have accessed the information for legitimate purposes, but others may have been curiosity seekers and may have even shared the information around. The account was 'only' a phone, not a BlackBerry or similar device, and Verizon believes it was just calling records, not voicemail or email that was compromised. The articles do not mention the similarity to the warrantless wiretapping or hospital records compromises of recent months. But that immediately sprang to mind for me."
Oversight is OK though right? He has nothing to hide.
If he stops the NSA from spying on domestics then I'll take back my comment.
Really ? The people who illegaly obtained access to "Joe the plumber"'s records, and went on to check all sorts of things on him are still perfectly gainfully employed by the government :
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/24/joe.html?sid=101
I guess it all depends what side you're on. Can't have peole being critical of the president, now can we ?
Hey Olame-a - I'm waiting for my $5000. Without tax increase (and I'm paying ZERO taxes). After the election you became very silent on this point ...
You're going to trust people that are buying and selling laws to record their conversations?
Every time a celebrity lands themselves in an ER (especially hospitals not accustomed VIPs) then we can expect several violations of HIPAA by unauthorized hospital staff.
They just cannot resist no matter how many times they are warned about activity being logged and threats of dismissal upon violation.
Right, because they want to make sure not to punish any employees who were not acting unethically. Once they determine who did what, they'll probably fire the bad ones, and possibly take legal action against them..
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
If there is sufficient evidence to connect the suspected employee, they will most likely be fired or worse. Denying the suspected parties their pay is inappropriate until more sufficient evidence is found. Having them show up at work would be inappropriate as well.
No, it's not an ideal situation. But what would you propose?
Sure it's like a vacation. A vacation where you might be fired or charged with a crime. Yeah, I'm jealous.
The parent comment does not deserve mod points. Individuals have been accused, are under investigation and innocent until proven otherwise.
> > Some of the employees may have accessed the information for legitimate purposes
> Like what?
Well, that's presumably why they're investigating.
There can be various technical reasons why a support tech or engineer or sysadmin or whoever looks at data that most people would think of as personal, but the engineer isn't seeing what other people are seeing. He's seeing technical stuff other people would never notice. I don't know a lot about phones, because I don't really support those, so I'll use email as an example instead. As a tech guy, I have on a number of occasions had reasons to look at a coworker's email (albeit, usually with their knowledge in my case), but if you'd asked me thirty seconds later who they'd received messages from or what they were about, I'd have had no idea. Maybe I was looking at whether messages were being retrieved from the server all the time in the background, or only when the inbox was open. Maybe I was looking at whether their outgoing messages were getting correct date headers and Message-IDs. Maybe I was sending a test message to myself to see how fast it went through, and the reply back. I'm sure there were other things, and I'm sure I don't remember every occasion, because it's not weird or unusual; it's a normal part of my job duties.
If I *wanted* to surreptitiously read the actual content of my coworkers' email, I would certainly be technically capable of doing that, and could be fairly confident of not being detected. But in the first place that wouldn't be ethical, and in the second place very little is of less interest to me than the content of my coworkers' email messages.
I am not saying the people who looked at Obama's calling records were doing so for legitimate reasons. I'm only saying that it's *plausible*, and the phone company is right to investigate _before_ taking any irrevocable action.
Incidentally, some people may be thinking that paid leave is letting them off easy, but having been through a situation where my employer had someone on paid leave for a while, I can say that in some instances the reason for doing this is because it allows the employer to place some kinds of restrictions on the employee that they wouldn't be able to place on them if they weren't being paid. I don't know for certain that this is the phone company's reason in this case, but it potentially could be. (It could also be they just don't want to penalize them until they investigate and determine for sure whether they did anything wrong. That could also be valid, from a cover-your-legal-self-in-case-of-lawsuits perspective if nothing else.)
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Since Obama voted for FISA it's only fair that the people have access to those records too. :)
Really ? The people who illegaly obtained access to "Joe the plumber"'s records, and went on to check all sorts of things on him
["all sorts of things" means, specifically, his driver's record, and whether or not he owed child support]
are still perfectly gainfully employed by the government
And so are these people. Didn't you even read the summary??? Verizon says the people involved have all been put on leave with pay.
"leave with pay" == "still employed." Sounds like a bonus, not a punishment!
I guess it all depends what side you're on.
Apparently not.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Do you think that the President Elect of the United States might have greater personal security concerns than McCain's version of a working class hero? This isn't a matter of "being critical of the president".
The President-Elect has a modern day Praetorian Guard protecting him. It would take either a professional team of assassins, or a very, very lucky suicide bomber/shooter to get anywhere near him. Joe the Plumber? Not so much.
Joe what's his name can't help the fact that McCain made him into a working class hero. He also can't help the fact that a number of people on the left wanted to destroy him for having the audacity to ask a hard, serious economic question of Obama that made Obama look bad. One radio host even called for him to be murdered.
So yeah, I'd say that he had more practical security precautions than a man who had the Secret Service protecting him and his immediate family.
I don't see any ranting and raving the press about the various government agencies that started checking up on Joe the Plumber after his 15 seconds of fame. I guess it's not interesting if Big Brother snoops on ordinary folks.
I agree... strangely. As an employee of a company, my conversations are on their systems, using their resources, so I would have to assume that they own those conversations. If the CEO of our company wanted to pull my records, I would have to believe he was well within his legal rights. As such, we, the people, should be like the CEO of this country. They are using resources that we payed for, and they work for us. So, as such, it's time to hand over those records... and pay us millions of dollars a year.
>>That's probably because, with the exception of Fox News,
>>the MSM still has a sliver of integrity left somewhere and
>>won't game the headline that way unless it's possible to
>>prove that the records were actually shared, as opposed
>>to just illegally accessed.
Bwaaaahahahahahahahahahaha!
Gah, that was a good one. If after this election anyone can claim the clearly biased in favor of Obama have any integrity at all...
The sad thing is the MSM is only beginning to realize just how badly they've screwed themselves here, and what they've done to their credibility because of it.
I watched Katie Couric on Letterman the other night shifting and smiling uncomfortably as Dave bounced all over the place congratulating her and the rest of the MSM for their work in getting Obama elected. She just kept on glaring at him with her eyes as her smiles kept getting bigger and bigger...
She knows what Dave doesn't--and that unless the MSM can quickly bury their involvement with this election the American public will remember and discount their biases come next election--something none of the MSM reporters, flacks, and punditry want, but far too many in the entertainment branches are drunk with power and won't SHUT UP about it.
--bornagainpenguin
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Lets see if they get the same slap on the wrist that government employees got for accessing Joe the Plumber's tax records, DMV records, medical records, and other supposedly private information.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Joe was just a guy in Ohio. Obama came to his house to campaign. He wasn't an "operative".
Do you guys even care that you're lying? Your guy won. There's no need to continue to smear and lie about Joe the Plumber.
"...Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... fuck with us."
far worse.
I can expect and do expect the President to be targets of this type of stuff and to have lots of people assigned to prevent it or minimize the damage. But when the power of government is brought to bear on an individual then it strikes me as very wrong and something that deserves more attention than what happened here.
The simply fact is, abuse of government positions happens all the time but goes unreported because the press does not value the offense. Joe the plumber got run over because to the press he supported the wrong candidate and worse embarrassed their selected candidate. To top it off one of the investigating (read: abusing) government officials also favored the candidate who Joe did not.
You can just go read all the pro-invade Palin's email on the hopes she did something wrong crowd here at /. to reveal just how warped this place has become. The number who defended getting to the email of a mere candidate were astounding and was purely driving my political leaning.
She surely scared the hell out of everyone outside the US...
The idea of a creationist ending up in charge of the US nuclear arsenal gave me the creeps
No sig for the moment.
Just imagine the outrage if someone had broken into one of the candidate's personal email accounts, and posted pictures of their children and private conversations, or...uh...wait...
No shit.
The left-wing kook crowd (all too prevalent on Slashdot) seems to think that it's perfectly OK that someone broke into Palin's email, AND that un-warranted illegal checks were run countless times on anyone who had an actual critical question about Obama, and yet thinks it's not okay that someone wanted to find out who Obama was talking to on the phone?
What if it turns out that long after he'd supposedly "cut off" certain people (Wright, Ayers, the various members of his campaign committee who had to be booted for connections to Hamas fundraising or lobbyist scandals, etc) he was still talking to them five times a week? Wouldn't that be a little "suspicious"?
And shouldn't we, to use the same argument the left-wing kooks used to justify invading the privacy of Palin, "have the right to know"?
If you can read this sig, congratulations, you have your glasses on!
1. Clinton administration snagging secret FBI background checks on all the nation's leading Republicans.
2. Democrats illegally recording Newt Gingrich cell phone call and leaking it to the press.
3. Democrat breaking into Gov Palin's e-mail account and plastering the contents all over the web.
4. Hoards of Democrats in a bunch of state offices digging into every possible government record looking for dirt on Joe-the-plumber (the average citizen who dared question the messiah)
5. Both McCain and Obama having their passport records breached
6. The pregnancy of Palin's under-age daughter and details about her boyfriend being splashed all-over the papers.
7. Palin's minor daughter's cell phone info being leaked onto the web
Actually, I though of all the recent breaches by people in both parties, but there seems to be a fixation on Cheney/Bush, and a baseless presumption that Democrats value privacy, on the net that is a bit tiresome and some balance is required. The problem is NOT that the wrong people are in charge or the wrong people are the victims; the problem is that humans are corruptible and too much power in the hands of too few, with too little oversight, will always lead to trouble. No matter which side of the aisle you are on, eventually your people will be the victims and the other people will be the perps. Best that people on both sides hammer-out better rules to protect the privacy of everybody... while still protecting everybody from real harm. Anybody who only notices and gets upset when somebody in his political party is violated is somebody who does not truly care about privacy
I believe GPs point was that no one is safe from having it happen to them, not that no one is safe from the consequences of doing the data theft. Obviously (sadly) if you're doing it on behalf of the government, you're ok.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Yeah I'm "a troll," and this dude is "insightful." If I have to hear "left-wing kook" or "right-wing Bible thumper" one more time, I'm gonna flip my fucking lid! There was a public outcry over the intrusion into Palin's email. And drop Ayers, Jesus! Start thinking critically and stop regurgitating what other people tell you. I could easily say similar things to some Liberals, but you are being a dumb ass right here, right now. I repeat: stop blaming "the Liberals" and 1. start having opinions that have critical thought put into them, and 2. start thinking of how you can help America not how everyone else is ruining it. That's just counterproductive self-pity.
There was no solid evidence prior to a vigilante breaking into Palin's inbox that any law was broken. There may have been an investigation in progress, I can't remember right now, but that is NOT the same thing as substantial evidence or a conviction.
With that single insight your entire argument about the relative moral and legal difference is destroyed.
Since you saw fit to throw in a politically based insult I will now do the same. Please sir, get your head out of Barak's colon and get some fresh air. Your critical thinking skills are oxygen starved.
You can just go read all the pro-invade Palin's email on the hopes she did something wrong crowd here at /. to reveal just how warped this place has become. The number who defended getting to the email of a mere candidate were astounding and was purely driving my political leaning.
Go to a left-leaning site and you'll find an astounding number of left-leaning idiots. Go to a right-leaning site and you'll find an astounding number of right-leaning idiots. The fact that you claim that this was purely driving your political leaning makes me suspect you're one of them as well.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer