Slashdot Mirror


USPS Logs All Snail Mail For Law Enforcement

The NY Times reports on a program in use by the United States Postal Service that photographs the exterior of every piece of mail going through the system and keeps it for law enforcement agencies. While the volume of snail mail is dropping, there were still over 160 billion pieces of mail last year. "The Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program was created after the anthrax attacks in late 2001 that killed five people, including two postal workers. Highly secret, it seeped into public view last month when the F.B.I. cited it in its investigation of ricin-laced letters sent to President Obama and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. It enables the Postal Service to retroactively track mail correspondence at the request of law enforcement. No one disputes that it is sweeping." This is in addition to the "mail covers" program, which has been used to keep tabs on mailings sent to and from suspicious individuals for over a century. "For mail cover requests, law enforcement agencies simply submit a letter to the Postal Service, which can grant or deny a request without judicial review. Law enforcement officials say the Postal Service rarely denies a request. In other government surveillance program, such as wiretaps, a federal judge must sign off on the requests. The mail cover surveillance requests are granted for about 30 days, and can be extended for up to 120 days. There are two kinds of mail covers: those related to criminal activity and those requested to protect national security. The criminal activity requests average 15,000 to 20,000 per year, said law enforcement officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are prohibited by law from discussing the requests. The number of requests for antiterrorism mail covers has not been made public."

12 of 324 comments (clear)

  1. Sigh by cyberpocalypse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I understand WHY the USPS would do this, I wonder how much money they've spend on storing data (the photos) all the while cutting the hours of employees due to budget cuts, etc. as for the comment by Bruce Schneier: "whether it was a postal worker taking down information or a computer taking images, the program was still an invasion of privacy." I disagree. There is a difference between taking an address down and reading your mail. I don't see Bruce complaining about UPS, FedEx, etc. doing the same. Get over it

    1. Re:Sigh by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      sadly today, probably, yes, you do need to explain it.

      The only thing sadder than our govt's secret slide into an Orwellian police state is that if they had just asked for the permissions, the public likely would have said no problemo! sigh.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    2. Re:Sigh by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do i really need to explain how the 4th should be preventing the USPS from turning over logging records EN MASSE to law enforcement?

      They're only photographing the *outside* of the mail, which, in TelCo speak, is the metadata and is also clearly in "plain sight". I'm not taking a position on whether this is "right" or "wrong", but I don't see how it's currently illegal. Personally, I've always assumed the US mail was (somehow) tracked and recorded, just like with UPS and FedEx.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:Sigh by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm wondering why there are still any unsolved major crimes. The government has access almost all of your communications. And if you have a cell phone they have a record of where that cell phone travels.

      Because criminals have suspected that "the government has access almost all of your communications" even if they didn't have express proof. The only communications that have ever been monitored (excepting throw-away phones and dead-drop mailing) have been law-abiding citizens who would never have thought to suspect that they were being monitored (and thus did nothing to obfuscate their communications).
      As someone else mentioned in another thread, this doesn't seem to solve major crimes, so it doesn't seem to be about solving major crimes. At best, minor crimes (except they don't meet the level to warrant a warrant, so really at best it's a waste of money). At worst, it's a handy way to gather data about political opponents even if that was never the intent (corruption and abuse happens; preventing tools like this from being abused is important enough to dismantle the tools themselves).

    4. Re:Sigh by g1powermac · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the entire mail piece is considered confidential, and only the necessary bits are to be read. As a former rural carrier, I can attest that you're not allowed to read someone's postcard or thumb through a magazine before delivering it. You're also not allowed to tell others about the kind of mail someone receives, like baby or bridal magazines and the logical conclusions of that type of mail. So, there is some expectation of privacy for mailing for everything except the from and to addresses.

  2. I defy the infidel postal service by paiute · · Score: 5, Funny

    You will never stop us, dogs of Satan! We are everywhere!
    sincerely,
    Muhammad bin Occupant

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  3. Can scan every item yet.... by ageoffri · · Score: 5, Informative

    So the USPS can scan and retain a copy of every single item and find it for law enforcement requests, yet they can't put together a decent package tracking system and insist on delivery confirmation.

    --
    -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
  4. Re:Not a big deal by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It has long been held by US courts that the exteriors of letters and other items sent through the mail are not considered private."

    Irrelevant. Systematic collection of public information can legally (not to mention morally) constitute "surveillance" and an invasion of privacy. Have you ever heard of stalkers? I've had people stalk me. Why would you give the government a pass or stalking when you wouldn't tolerate it from anyone else?

    "It makes sense that they are allowed to photograph and record them for later use."

    It makes sense to them. It doesn't make sense from a citizen's perspective. And guess which is more important?

    "I mean, did you really think that a piece of mail sent through a government controlled organization would be hidden from law enforcement?"

    Again: there is a very big difference between information simply being "public", and a systematic collection of that information. The courts have recognized this.

    "... but still not really a big deal."

    (Sound of loud buzzer.) Ehhhhh... sorry. That's not quite the answer we were looking for. Perhaps you'd prefer to live in Cuba?

  5. Re:They take photos? by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Would you care if your wife/girlfriends package from adam and eve, or victorias secret was photoed?

    How about the box your penis pump came in?

    All your vitamins and supplements ordered online?

    The point is not everyone WANTS THE GOVERNMENT TO HAVE DATA ON EVERY BIT OF THEIR PRIVATE LIFE!

    It is people like you with the blase I dont care when someone is shoving a baseball bat in your ass that are helping the plutocracy ruin this country. Your complacence makes me ill.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  6. Re:Not a big deal by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I send a letter, I don't expect the outside of the envelope to be private, fair enough. If I drive down the street I don't expect my license plate to be private. If I walk down the street I don't expect that to be a private act. What I do expect to be private is the records of all those actions going back months and years. This isn't just a matter of degree, there is a fundamental difference between any single action being public and a log of every action I've ever performed being private.

  7. Re:They take photos? by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with keeping logs forever is that you may be boring today, but what if you aren't tomorrow?

    Laws change. Governments change. 20 years from now who's to say you won't offend some politician who will then say "find me something in this man's history that we can maliciously misinterpret as evidence of a crime". That sort of thing has happened for centuries. The only defense is to limit the amount they have to work with.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Re:They take photos? by stenvar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except (as far as the article implies), the government isn't aware of what's in the box.

    They know the sender and the recipient. That gives them just enough information to get you into trouble. For example, you may order from a chemical company, an electronics company, and a Islamic book store, and their software may flag you as a potential terrorist because everybody else who has received packages from these three companies has been. Now you face endless interviews when you try to travel, restrictions when you try to get a government job, etc. It doesn't even matter that what you actually ordered was completely harmless.

    And if some prosecutor gets it into his head that you really are a terrorist, out of the millions of bits and pieces of information about you, he can then pick out exactly those that fit his theory: "In addition to those suspicious packages he received, he made five postings to Slashdot expressing anti-government sentiments and saying bad things about the president. For the past five months, he has had breakfast in the same IHOP as another foreign terrorist suspect 17 times, and we believe they were using the soap dispenser to pass clandestine messages. Etc." If they have enough data on you, they can certainly enough to convince a grand jury, and either blackmail you into making a deal, or even win a case.

    Having lots of data on people is intrinsically dangerous, even if you think you have nothing to hide and have committed no crimes.