Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Connect 91% of Numbers With Names In Metadata Probe

Posted by samzenpus on from the looking-at-the-list dept.

Trailrunner7 writes "One of the key tenets of the argument that the National Security Agency and some lawmakers have constructed to justify the agency's collection of phone metadata is that the information it's collecting, such as phone numbers and length of call, can't be tied to the callers' names. However, some quick investigation by some researchers at Stanford University who have been collecting information voluntarily from Android users found that they could correlate numbers to names with very little effort. The Stanford researchers recently started a program called Metaphone that gathers data from volunteers with Android phones. They collect data such as recent phone calls and text messages and social network information. The goal of the project, which is the work of the Stanford Security Lab, is to draw some lines connecting metadata and surveillance. As part of the project, the researchers decided to select a random set of 5,000 numbers from their data and see whether they could connect any of them to subscriber names using just freely available Web tools. The result: They found names for 27 percent of the numbers using just Google, Yelp, Facebook and Google Places. Using some other online tools, they connected 91 of 100 numbers with names."

9 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. No shit by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Informative

    Phone numbers are listed in things like telephone books. NSA (and other intelligence agencies; let's not forget about the rest of them) have been ingesting telephone directories, business cards, public records, FB pages, ad nauseum into massive databases for many years so that a new name/number/address/email etc can be matched to known correlates.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    1. Re:No shit by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Phone numbers are listed in things like telephone books. NSA (and other intelligence agencies; let's not forget about the rest of them) have been ingesting telephone directories, business cards, public records, FB pages, ad nauseum into massive databases for many years so that a new name/number/address/email etc can be matched to known correlates.

      Even metadata consisting only of Cell numbers are available to the NSA because they have access to all the carriers records as well.

      Even a "Burner" phone is traceable in the US.

      There is no such thing as "metadata", and there hasn't been for a long time.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  2. Wha'? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

    One of the key tenets of the argument that the National Security Agency and some lawmakers have constructed to justify the agency's collection of phone metadata is that the information it's collecting, such as phone numbers and length of call, can't be tied to the callers' names.

    I don't believe I've heard anyone, in the government or not, make that claim. What possible good would metadata be to them if they couldn't associate it with an individual?

    What I've mainly heard them say is "you shouldn't care, since we're not listening to the actual call". That's still garbage.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Wha'? by s.petry · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Then you have not listened to much of the debate. Clapper and others in offices have stated that metadata is completely anonymous and therefor not a risk. They have also said what you note. This is a campaign of denial and deceit trying to cover all possible ground. Additionally, TV media has been pretty silent on the issues so they are trying to keep things quiet and away from the masses.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    2. Re:Wha'? by oodaloop · · Score: 5, Informative

      The idea behind using metadata without names is building a network diagram showing who is in contact with whom. If you have one bad guy talking to another through an intermediary, it's not necessarily important to know the name or names of all the people in between, so much as it is important to know that they are in cahoots, so to speak. That information can then be the starting point for further investigation. With massive graphs of this sort, you can start to look for important nodes, identify roles and TTPs (tactics, techniques, and procedures), and flow of information from number and direction of links. I don't support the unconstitutional searching of Americans' data, but I do understand the methodology of network analysis. (IAA Intelligence Analyst)

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  3. This is my shocked face by redmid17 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Goon on Stanford for confirming this, but it should have been pretty evident how easily the metadata can be used to identify people for a while now. The fact the NSA said it couldn't be used to do so should lead one to believe the opposite right off the bat.

  4. Re:This is god. by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please clarify:

    1. We are bastards. We need to get raped by a horse.

    -or- 2. We are having sex with bastards. The bastards need to get raped by a horse.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  5. With what accuracy by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just because you've connected 123.233.266.41 with "Bob Smith", doesn't mean you've actually connected to the right person. We've already seen cases where RIAA supoena's to ISP's have gotten the addresses of grandmothers who can barely use email much less file-sharing... so how do we know there "connections" are accurate.

  6. In related news ... by Cassini2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the NSA automatically identifies telemarketers, and does nothing.