Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Rejects Freedom of Information Act Request About Carrier IQ

Posted by Soulskill on from the let's-jump-to-conclusions dept.

bonch writes with news that website Muckrock recently sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the FBI asking for "manuals, documents or other written guidance used to access or analyze data gathered by programs developed or deployed by Carrier IQ." The Bureau has now responded with a rejection of the request, claiming an exemption applies because such documents "could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings." While many have been quick to assume the worst, the Muckrock article says it's unclear "whether the FBI used Carrier IQ's software to in its own investigations, whether it is currently investigating Carrier IQ, or whether it is some combination of both - not unlikely given the recent uproar over the practice coupled with the U.S. intelligence communities reliance on third-party vendors."

14 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. I'm stunned by mr1911 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A government agency does not want to hand over information that may link it to abusing its power. I've never heard of such a thing. Maybe Eric Holder is advising them as to handle the situation.

    --
    This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
    Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    1. Re:I'm stunned by snowgirl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A government agency does not want to hand over information that may link it to abusing its power. I've never heard of such a thing. Maybe Eric Holder is advising them as to handle the situation.

      ... or your government might not want to hand over information that it is investigating a criminal act by a corporation.

      If you filed a FOIA request for Maddof's case while they were building it, they would have denied that one, too, but not because they were abusing their power.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    2. Re:I'm stunned by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My *bet* is it came from some middle manager. Who came up with the idea of 'metrics'.

      So you believe that this spyware was installed on all those devices based on a decision that someone in "middle management" made?

      And this one middle manager made this decision for at least three separate companies (Apple, HTC and Samsung)?

      I had no idea that Apple, HTC and Samsung had all hired the same middle manager. I've heard of people with three jobs, but this must be one hard-working middle manager.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:I'm stunned by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Citations?

      The KGB and Stasi were remarkably successful at what they did. Yes, I know that the US is moving beyond their example, but how far down that road are we? IMO, the UK is much further along than the US is. And, you could probably make a case for the UK surpassing the USSR. But, citations are in order, if you make that attempt. Not to mention, any attempts to quantify and to qualify the comparisons might be suspect. Are there records available somewhere, documenting how many Stasi there were, and how frequently they monitored each citizen? Can we check their reliability in identifying "enemies of the state"?

      Your final sentence is almost certainly correct. But, how do we verify that?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:I'm stunned by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good thing we elected Obama to stop this shit.

      Note to future voters: look at actions, not words.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:I'm stunned by zeeed · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I am not paranoia, I KNOW that I am being followed.

      That's pretty much the definition of paranoia, given that you don't have material evidence.

    6. Re:I'm stunned by Yvanhoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you could go back to the Cold War era and tell Western citizens that in 2011 they would all carry a device that is always on, is comprised of a microphone and a speaker and broadcast their location to central databases that archive that during several years they would tell you : "so, USSR won ?"

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  2. Re:Does it really matter ? by nomel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think something about that last bit is where any interest in the data might come from.

  3. Re:Does it really matter ? by poena.dare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wise question. Simple answer. 3rd party data collection is cheaper for the carriers.

    CEO: These constant warrantless wiretap requests are a pain in the ass. It's only going to get worse.

    CTO: There's a app for that, y'know.

  4. Stallman Was Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel. Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that." - The Right to Read

  5. Re:Does it really matter ? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The US government relies on vendors for just about everything.

    Including circumventing Constitutional safeguards against unreasonable search and seizure!

    Hey! Look! Google and Facebook are a Trojan Horse for the unaccountable Police State!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  6. Re:Does it really matter ? by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do you realize...

    you can live life w/o google and facebook?

    You just have to move to a remote mountain town here in the rockies and get real good at farming, ez right?

    Sure....

    I've read enough to know those little backcountry mountain towns are the power base for the invasive state security apparatus, "I don't care if a few eggs get broken, just so the one or two things we actually care about get overturned or banned." That attitude, on the part of millions of rural Americans paved the way for Iraq.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  7. Re:Does it really matter ? by Sancho · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly. It's a legal warrantless wiretap, which is the problem.

  8. Re:Does it really matter ? by flaming+error · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > it spells out clearly that you are being monitored and
    > have 0 expectation of privacy
    Website privacy policy != TOS, and provide a URL or it didn't happen.

    No contract with a carrier voids the constitution.