Slashdot Mirror
FBI Rejects Freedom of Information Act Request About Carrier IQ
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."
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.
The rule is: If we don't want you to know, then there's an applicable exemption to the rule.
And we know where you were last Summer...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I think something about that last bit is where any interest in the data might come from.
If the FBI is using Carrier IQ data for investigative purposes, doesn't that call into question the earlier claim from security researchers that Carrier IQ isn't logging data?
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order, and will be asked to leave the future, immediately.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
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.
"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
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..."
constant warrantless wiretap requests
There is no evidence of any warrantless wiretapping occouring. Let me explain.
Customer wants a phone, customer signs TOS agreeing to be monitored. Carrier does monitoring of customer, which customer agreed to. FBI wants data for an investigation. FBI pays carrier to get records of customer, which customer agreed to allow to be collected and logged. This is not a "warrantless wiretap" just as walking into an FBI office and handing them copies of all your records voluntarily is not a warrantless wiretap.
I completely get that the outcome of the process, is essentially the same as allowing the FBI to have wiretaps, but only on those who agree to it voluntarily, by way of the carrier TOS. Much like it's a given that Googles log data will be sold to the FBI, and Google clearly spells it out in their TOS.
The meat of this entire issue, is that, there is currently no way to get a phone in the US, from a carrier, and opt-out of the data collection process, such that one does not voluntarily leave a trail of everything they do. Being able to opt-out, would require law enforcement to get a judge approved wiretap to collect current and future information, as no log will have existed ( in the being able to opt out scenario ).
The new National Defense Authorization Act contains an amendment allowing the military the authority to detain American citizens, on American soil, indefinitely and without access to an attorney. The President has said he'll veto it; write to him and hold him to it! This has wide bipartisan support, and while I'm typically hesitant of doomsaying about America becoming a police state, this is the legal codification of one!
http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA
People, there is a path here...
http://androidforums.com/evo-4g-all-things-root/459292-how-do-i-remove-carrier-iq-software.html
Rom your phone, walla no more carrier ifucked.
It's little things like this why the art of hacking is not all lost despite the American social media's mass confusion.
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
Is Carrier IQ collecting data from customers without their knowledge? Does the FBI have warrants granting them access to those customers' data? If the answer to the former is yes and the answer to the latter is no, what we have is quite literally a warrantless wiretap. It's just that the wiretapping is being carried out by a different party than the one that's supposed to get a warrant.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Exactly. It's a legal warrantless wiretap, which is the problem.
> 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.
"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism.
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
--Pravin Lal
This has zip, 0, nada, to do with the constitution, but you don't get that, because you are on a witch hunt, looking for a witch to burn.
Go read the mobile device privacy policy / TOS. It's spelled out in black and white. I know this to be a fact for Verizons network, which ironically, apparently, doesn't use CarrierIQ. When you sign up for phone service, you agree to be logged, and you agree to allow {carrier} to give the data to 3rd parties. You have agreed to this. It's no more a violation of the constitution as taking a test and handing it to the teacher, at which point, the teacher can do whatever they want with it. You wouldn't call that a warrantless wiretap would you ?
When you are done with the witch hunt, the cries of constitutional violations, etc, and you actually start to focus on how to solve the problem, you will realize nothing short of legislation requiring carriers to allow you to opt out will fix this.
In the meantime, have fun getting angry and burning witches. Anything short of demanding our government representatives fix this via legislation that allows you to opt out will just be wasted emotion, time, and energy.
Google didn't put it in Android but a number of Android OEMs ARE using CarrierIQ, mostly at the behest of carriers like AT&T who said "include CarrierIQ or we wont sell your new phone"