Slashdot Mirror
German Politician Demonstrates Extent of Cellphone Location Tracking
frnic writes "Deutsche Telekom is tracking its customers' locations and saving the information: '.... as a German Green party politician, Malte Spitz, recently learned, we are already continually being tracked whether we volunteer to be or not. Cellphone companies do not typically divulge how much information they collect, so Mr. Spitz went to court to find out exactly what his cellphone company, Deutsche Telekom, knew about his whereabouts. The results were astounding. In a six-month period — from Aug 31, 2009, to Feb. 28, 2010, Deutsche Telekom had recorded and saved his longitude and latitude coordinates more than 35,000 times. It traced him from a train on the way to Erlangen at the start through to that last night, when he was home in Berlin. Mr. Spitz has provided a rare glimpse — an unprecedented one, privacy experts say — of what is being collected as we walk around with our phones."
And they were worried about Google?!!!
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
"I don't have a cell phone. I won't carry a cell phone. It's Stalin's dream. Cell phones are tools of Big Brother. I'm not going to carry a tracking device that records where I go all the time, and I'm not going to carry a surveillance device that can be turned on to eavesdrop."
to leave your cellphone turned off when you aren't using it.
Follow him how he moves (ignore the german gibberish, the only thing that interests you is the bar "Geschwindigkeit" ("speed") where you can regulate how fast time flows in the interactive thingie there:
http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten
The German newspaper Die Zeit who was given access to this data has a visualization of his whereabouts for the 6 months. Press play and adjust speed with the slider to the right. The data is annotated with short reports of his day glimpsed from his Twitter account and blog.
http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten
Free Manning, jail Obama.
For a cell phone to work... it needs to know where you are !
This is because the connection or the data packets need to be routed to a radio that can physically transmit them to you. That is the radio that defines the cell. The cell is in a place. The radio has to transmit the packets to you - which is a direction within the cell.
For the billing to work... you need to keep records! Because.. the radios and the backhaul belong to lots of different people, all of whom need paying.
Now ; how many criminals/terrorists have been tracked by virtue of these records? Many.
Is it right? Well, if you want a cell phone, you have to accept this - because thats the way it works, and there is no way it will change in the foreseeable future.
--------------------------------------------- "In the end, we're all just water and old stars."
Richard Stallman (of the Free Software Foundation) calls cellphones 'tracking devices' and the last time I heard him talk he refused to carry one. It can be useful if you think of cellphones in that way (they weren't designed as tracking devices, but they're certainly being used that way now).
Richard Stallman might sound like a kook, but turns out to be correct yet again. Just like he was about ebooks.
I mean, if I'm not doing anything wrong, what's the problem if Google, the goverment, or such, track me?
Here is the direct link to the visualisation tool: http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten
It's how the CIA were found kidnapping people in Italy. They'd been traced througout all of Europe by means of their cell-phones. This was public knowledge at the time of the Italian government complaints, it was public knowledge at the time that the police wanted easier access to reduce both governmental and non-governmental kidnaps, why the surprise now?
I'm not keen on the idea, but damnit the CIA example does illustrate that it may be a necessary tool for protection against governmental abuses. I'd argue that if that line is accepted, then the information should be stored in a manner that prevents access outside of a lawful enquiry authorized by a recognized court or a lawful query by the monitored individual as per the European data protection standards. How you'd enforce that is difficult.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I'm tempted to create a startup company where we'll pick up your phone and park it wherever you're supposed to be (your office, etc), while you run off to wherever you really want to go; and at the same time give you a loaner-phone where we'd forward your calls to you.
Because that's how cell phones work. Cell phone companies must know where you are so that they can route your calls and data to the nearest cell phone tower.
In other shocking news... your landline provider, cable provider and isp know where you live. OMG!
Don't be retarded, there's no way they have to STORE your phone POSITION months and months back. I doubt they even have to store it at all for it to work. If it were merely information deduced from billing as in "you were somewhere in area X because you made a call through carrier Y which is only active there", that's another thing. That's not what this is. This is the systematic tracking of data beyond that which is necessary for the network to work.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
OK, assume that it is a given that cell phone companies have this information. When someone is killed why do the police not simply pull the information for everyone that was within, say 500 feet, at the time of the murder? This would give them not only a potential suspect list but it would also give them a list of witnesses.
Right now, if you kill someone and keep your mouth shut you stand only about a 20% chance of being caught and convicted. You can be sure that this weighs in on the decision to (a) carry a deadly force weapon and (b) use it perhaps indiscriminately. If murderers were, say 90% caught and convicted instead of only 20% the rather obnoxious murder rate in cities might drop. It is somewhere between 0.5 and 2 murders every single day in nearly every large city in the US.
If this tool exists, it isn't being used by police. They don't have to get to pushy about it, but if they had a list of people that were in the area even if the murderer didn't have a cell phone on him at the time there is a high likelyhood that someone would have seen something.
Why wouldn't a witness come forward? There is a powerful force to discourage witnesses from coming forward in cities - they even sell T-shirts saying "Stop Snitching". Nobody wants to be a witness because it means putting your life at risk. The way things stand (with a rate of 20% of murders being caught and convicted) the police cannot possibly protect witnesses and there is a strong incentive to make sure that no witness will ever speak out. Given only a 1 in 5 chance of being convicted of killing a witness there is no way to get witnesses to place their life on hold and their life at risk for the chance (much less than 20%) that the murderer will not be out on the street looking for revenge.
http://www.zeit.de/digital/datenschutz/2011-03/data-protection-malte-spitz Scroll down a bit in that article, and you can even pull a copy of the spreadsheet with location data.
http://www.cointelpro2.com/
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2967542171184509301#
One thing is tracking the other is using this data. I believe in the whole world mobile operators collect this data just because they can. In Germany there is more transparency about what can get used when. So it kind of balances out. In a rather simplified way using any data that is not necessary for serving the customer or billing is forbidden. Police gets access to all the data, but it should have a court order and may not do dragnet operations.
I have worked a long time at a mobile operator in Germany but do not claim to have a complete picture about everything what happens there.
And in other news: Your doctor has access to your medical record, your bank has access to your transaction details
Tracking a customer’s whereabouts is part and parcel of what phone companies do for a living. Every seven seconds or so, the phone company of someone with a working cellphone is determining the nearest tower, so as to most efficiently route calls. And for billing reasons, they track where the call is coming from and how long it has lasted.
“At any given instant, a cell company has to know where you are; it is constantly registering with the tower with the strongest signal,” said Matthew Blaze, a professor of computer and information science at the University of Pennsylvania who has testified before Congress on the issue.
Mr. Spitz’s information, Mr. Blaze pointed out, was not based on those frequent updates, but on how often Mr. Spitz checked his e-mail.
So, each call record (CDR) comes with a "cell ID" so big meanie telco knows where were you and what network serviced you and thus how to bill you. They could save your cell registration as you move around, but they don't need that unless the police explicitly asks them to (legal requirements may vary), but this was not the case, so they didn't.
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
It needs to know where you are *NOW* it fdoes not need to know where youw ere 5 minutes ago. Therefore saving the data is a no-no and a big privacy breach.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
It has to be noted that nearly a year before this story first broke (Feb. 24th in the German newspaper "Die Zeit"; direct link to visualisation: http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten ), on March 2nd, 2010, the Bundesverfassungsgericht (lit.: federal constitutional court) declared the law in question void. The data in question only still existed because ongoing litigation by Mr. Spitz prevented its deletion. This is not, at this time, still happening.
Nevertheless, the EU directive it implemented still exists, and as is now standard for legislation concerned with security, it is really, really scary. If you live in the EU, this concerns you, so do write your MP or commissioner about it. Security should not be scary. For reference, its full name is "Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC".
1) Sell tinfoil-lined pants
2) (no service available)
3) Profit!
I wish we could get a 'Police need a Court Warrant to get this info' sort of law. Also a 'must only keep what data you must need to run the main service'. Cell phone companies are utilities, and should have a distinction from other companies offering a service. Government regulation of rights is not unwarranted. Kind of like unlisted laws and telmarketing data from POTS restrictions. Keep in mind cell towers tend to be placed every 1-2 miles to suburbia. That doesn't lend it's self to the free market.
What interesting patterns could emerge from looking at cell phone location data of millions of people over a period of time, and place the lines on a map. I bet some interesting patterns would emerge. Don't get me wrong though: privacy is freedom. Lack of it, is slavery. Of course corporations, our new masters, are going to be tracking us like we would a pet, or a tagged farm animal. What else did you expect from a non human entity who's sole driver is the accumulation of more wealth by whatever means available?
It's always amazing and rare that anyone in trouble is ever found using this deep and voluminous data. Why?
No points for me today.
No phone company could ever be forced to divulge those sort of records simply because a customer demanded it.
We have very strong privacy protections in this country - for the telcos
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
This information could be used by the customers themselves. Worried parents tracking their children, employers tracking company phones (everyone that works outdoors could be tracked, for coordination and evaluation purposes).
It sucks, I know. But this is doable, and why would a customer be forbidden to track his own propriety?
My uncle and cousin both work for major cell phone manufacturers, RIM and Motorola, one is an executive and the other is a developer. The FBI closely works with both of them to integrate eavesdropping technologies. Specifically, they can remotely turn on the microphone without turning the phone itself on so you never realize it's on and transmitting your conversations back to them. Not only that, they can leave it on for days and record everything. The only way to bypass it, is to take out the battery entirely. I'm sure, though, that in the near future they'll thwart that by having a smaller non-removable battery that no one knows about in the phones as a backup.
Whereas, the fact that they can track your whereabouts at any time is pretty common knowledge. The police have been using it in missing persons and murder cases for years. The difference is that this isn't limited to the FBI, the police and courts have access to it. The police can go back and determine if you were near the scene a crime. Or, better yet, if they suspect you dumped a body in say, a river, they can figure out where you did it by tracing your location they expect you dumped it.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
Germany had a data retention law requiring all phone data logs be saved for 6 months. It was ruled unconstitutional on March 2, 2010. So during the time period of the records in question, Deutsche Telekom was simply complying with German law.
From TFA:
In the United States, telecommunication companies do not have to report precisely what material they collect, said Kevin Bankston, a lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who specializes in privacy. He added that based on court cases he could say that “they store more of it and it is becoming more precise.”
“Phones have become a necessary part of modern life,” he said, objecting to the idea that “you have to hand over your personal privacy to be part of the 21st century.”
In the United States, there are law enforcement and safety reasons for cellphone companies being encouraged to keep track of its customers. Both the F.B.I. and the Drug Enforcement Administration have used cellphone records to identify suspects and make arrests.
If the information is valuable to law enforcement, it could be lucrative for marketers. The major American cellphone providers declined to explain what exactly they collect and what they use it for.
Verizon, for example, declined to elaborate other than to point to its privacy policy, which includes: “Information such as call records, service usage, traffic data,” the statement in part reads, may be used for “marketing to you based on your use of the products and services you already have, subject to any restrictions required by law.”
AT&T, for example, works with a company, Sense Networks, that uses anonymous location information “to better understand aggregate human activity.” One product, CitySense, makes recommendations about local nightlife to customers who choose to participate based on their cellphone usage. (Many smartphone apps already on the market are based on location but that’s with the consent of the user and through GPS, not the cellphone company’s records.)
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
billing data != location data
Billing data is just 2 phone numbers and the duration of the call. Nothing more. I don't see how knowing your precise geographical location can make the taxation easier.
Roaming charges.
As long as roaming charges exist, they have an excuse to track your location "because of the billing".
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
It isn't what they know about me buying bread that worries me. It is the fact that they can, if they should choose to, log my life in some detail. Don't understand yet?
If they know my life and the lives of everyone else in such detail they can control the population with ease.
If you still don't get it, try imagining a government which decides to impose unpopular policies and restrict your rights. With these technologies already in place they can do that tomorrow. If the technology was not in place it would take them years to achieve their goal.
The more technology which is set up ready to log your movements and easily control your access to communication the more likely it is that it will be used for just that.
It is already happening but you have become so used to it that you haven't noticed. Wake up and start thinking.
Under Australian Telecommunications law your phone has two sets of conversations. One set is the obvious one relating to the people that you call, the other occurs between you and the carrier. Each time that your phone connects, polls or hands over to another tower you are "having a conversation" with the carrier which you have expressly permitted, if the phone hands over GPS location data at the same time so much the better. The carriers are running wild with the possibilities and have been buying petabytes of storage to capture the flood. Currently a phone only polls the local tower every two hours if you're not moving, however they're getting the federal government to pay for a system upgrade which will enable this information to be captured every 5min. The stated reason for this upgrade is the ability to send emergency sms messages but the carriers are loving the extra data.
The irony is that after your phone is stolen both police and providers will claim they cannot track the device. That surely is a very comfortable way of lying your way out of doing some useful work.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
You provide a link, and get modded "Informative", but your link doesn't support your claim.
Your link says that the FBI can activate the microphone in a cell phone that is already on. That is not the same as turning on a phone that is off.
When I want to not be tracked, I just live my phone at home.
You, sir, just managed to match one of our word patterns. Mind climbing into that van, we'd have a few questions.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That's why I have a landline. Track THAT!!!
If you need to travel unmonitored, ensure your phone goes somewhere else and remember that potential alibi.
Comms can be taken care of by expendable phones or other methods. The wise revolutionary doesn't resent surveillance so much as seek to exploit it. The default of people monitoring other people will be to trust their monitoring system.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Im happy he came forward with this information but at the same time, with T-Mobile's recent multi billion dollar deal, it reeks. Did he threaten Tmobile to go public with this information unless they paid up?
How does the excuse "simply complying with German law" not freak everyone in Europe out?
I have yet to find a cellphone that turns on without a battery. Remove the goddamn battery. Problem solved.
The nationality of the company has nothing to do with it, any company of Google's size and importance will come under scrutiny.
It is clearly a good thing that we keep Google and others in check, never in history has the phrase "quis custodiet ipsos custodes" been more appropriate. For who does watch the watchmen?
I find this very interesting because privacy researcher Chris Soghoian noted in a recent blog post that T-Mobile was the only major US wireless carrier that wasn't logging IP addresses and visited URLs of its users. He was lamenting the fact that AT&T's takeover would further erode privacy.Guess not, eh?
Why should everyone in Europe freak out? We have nothing to do with Germany or its laws.
Perhaps you don't understand the difference between a continent and a [federal] country?
*whoosh*
guys in dark glasses with guns never ask politely.
you must be new to the planet earth.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
All billing data is in the CDR (call data record, duh!) stored at the end of the call. The location records are kept for legal purposes only. Most countries require cell phone providers to do so and in a lot of countries, the police and security agencies can request your whereabouts on a certain day and time without a subpoena. Big brother is watching you, unless you switch off your cell.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
In the UK, that information is readily available to anyone using a Freedom of Information Act request.
As with all personal data, they should have a proper plan for disposing of the data after a certain legal period of time.
It does put into context how hyperactive (and stupid) the German government was in reacting to the Google Streetview thing. Typical of politicians.
Sadly this often doesn't turn up until after a couple of hundred posts based on the lack of that information and almost without fail the story itself remains unchanged, proudly maintaining its glaring omission.
Who called 911 about a disturbance but then decided to end the call without giving any information. By using online services that locate cell towers, I am pretty certain he is within range of only one cell tower. The cops showed up at his exact location some minutes later. Incidentally, there is no street address at his rural location that could be tied to him or his bill in any way. However, his phone does have a GPS unit.
So, how did the cops find his location? Is GPS info somehow transmitted on 911 calls?
How many more years will slashdot have an off-by-one error on your Score in your profile?
That would be "saltpetre" not "salpetre" surely if following the UK English spelling? ;-)
(hung by your own petard?)
Well, in my experience they do ask politely first. After all, we... I mean, they don't want to make a fuss and upset the bystanders.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Your "quadrant" is known due to you being in the range of a certain tower and not in the range of others.
In order to provide the service without interruptions, in an urban area, most of the time you are in range of several towers.
Add to that the fact that the mobile phone is by its nature intended for communication while moving from one place to the other, and it should be pretty clear that they are getting more than enough data to pinpoint your exact location at any given time - regardless if they are receiving only your "quadrant" info or your exact GPS data.
Not apologizing anyone. Just stating the facts. Yelling and shaking your fists at the sky won't help.
Particularly if you have your head buried in the sand at the same time.
Data retention of your past locations is another issue entirely.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Salpetre, Sulphur and Glycerine. Just because you may be from the USA should not excuse you for 3 spelling mistakes in a row. ;)
Now get on the programe!
Don't you mean "programme"?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Google this and Google that, you clearly missed the point, size and importance, I even made the text bold to emphasize it.
Any company, now and in the future, that has this amount of influence, power and impact on whole countries is going to have be kept in check. There is no anti-Google sentiment in this, there's only pertinent vigilance.
While Google may strive to achieve new and good things they're not always aware of the [unintended] consequences or legal issues that arise. We as democratic nations must keep sustained attention on their activities that may fall foul of our laws and principles by chance or with intent. Germany's history in particular serves as an example and only underlines the importance of vigilance.
There are many interesting applications of Google's technologies out there, it doesn't mean it should always be allowed. This is a democratic and legal issue, not a technological one. If you really can't see how important that is I believe you are correct; they must see something you don't.
You know when somebody says "the correct spelling is..." there will be a source which gives it another spelling :-)
Me, I am British, so I'll take the Oxford English Dictionary's spelling ;-) (though to be fair it also offers salpetre that it notes as being a more archaic form)
saltpetre, n.
Second edition, 1989; online version March 2011. ; accessed 27 March 2011. Earlier version first published in New English Dictionary, 1909.
Pronunciation: /sltpitr/ /--/
Forms: Also 15–18 (now U.S.) saltpeter, 15 saltpetir, saltpetur, 16 saltpetar, 15–16 saltpeeter....
Etymology: Alteration of salpetre n. after salt n.1 (see sense 5b).
1.
a. Potassium nitrate; = nitre n. 1b Chili or cubic saltpetre : sodium nitrate.
(etc.)
yup. But no more or less 'cool' than any other weapons system.
Personally I think weapons are very uncool.
yup. But no more or less 'cool' than any other weapons system.
Personally I think weapons are very uncool.
Until you happen to need one.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
How do you say that? Douche telecom? The name alone should have been a tipoff.
Anyone who has watched CSI or Law & Order or Bones or any other crime program in the past 10 years knows that the telephone companies store this data for law enforcement.
I have sat in the public gallery of a court where a man was charged with attempting to murder his family by setting their house on fire with them in it. He denied it right up to the point where a witness was called who told the court that she took a call from him around the time of the fire. Next up, a forensic technical examiner took him through the route his phone took that night: from his home directly to an associate's house, directly to a petrol forecourt where his friend's credit card paid for a gallon of unleaded and a gas canteen (and he was shown on CCTV waiting in the passenger seat of the car by pump #4), then directly to another house (his ex-girlfriend's, IIRC, although there was nobody in at the time), where not long after the call was made, the house went up, then to his family's home which also went up. Then he was dropped back at his home.
He's now doing 18 to life on two counts of arson with intent and seven counts of attempted murder.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Yet, when the law became unconstitutional, telcos were ordered to immediatly delete the data. Which didn't happen...
"Until you happen to need one"
I choose to live in a society where I don't need to use or carry petards.