Slashdot Mirror
Department of Justice Harvests Cell Phone Data Using Planes
Tyketto writes The US Department of Justice has been using fake communications towers installed in airplanes to acquire cellular phone data for tracking down criminals, reports The Wall Street Journal. Using fix-wing Cessnas outfitted with DRT boxes produced by Boeing, the devices mimic cellular towers, fooling cellphones into reporting "unique registration information" to track down "individuals under investigation." The program, used by the U.S. Marshals Service, has been in use since 2007 and deployed around at least five major metropolitan areas, with a flying range that can cover most of the US population. As cellphones are designed to connect to the strongest cell tower signal available, the devices identify themselves as the strongest signal, allowing for the gathering of information on thousands of phones during a single flight. Not even having encryption on one's phone, like found in Apple's iPhone 6, prevents this interception. While the Justice Department would not confirm or deny the existence of such a program, Verizon denies any involvement in this program, and DRT (a subsidiary of Boeing), AT&T, and Sprint have all declined to comment.
I'm not exactly against them catching criminals, but how often has someone receive shitty cell service and 'drops' because of these fake towers?
If they have caused just one 911 call to fail or be delayed, someone needs to be pilloried.
The end does not justify the means.
Unreasonable search and seizure.
I'm sorry, but this is blanket surveillance, without warrant, probable cause, or oversight.
At a certain point, the court needs to weigh in on this, because DoJ and the rest of law enforcement are completely ignoring the Constitution, the law, and pretty much everything else.
Why is this not landing these clowns in jail?
When your government becomes hostile to your rights, it's time to become hostile to your government.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Nobody who was paying attention voted for Obama because of his anti-surveillance promises. The moment he voted for telecom retroactive immunity it was clear he wasn't about "Change" at all. I don't know why people were so easily fooled by his charade, just looking at his voting history would have made it all very clear.
The U.S. Constitution was written by people who had just violently overthrown their government, who were quoted saying things like "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." If the American Revolution were happening today, King George would be calling them "terrorists." And you think the 2nd Amendment somehow doesn't suggest using force against government oppression?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
The problem with this approach comes from trying to define 'oppressive.' You may like the idea of a clerk misplacing the paperwork required to authorise the use of force on peaceful protesters, yes. But elsewhere, another clerk has decided that the government has no right to 'redefine marriage' and is quietly smuging the ink on the appropriate applications to make sure gay couples don't get processed. Both would view themselves as the heroes, bravely risking their job to fight against a government exceeding lawful authority.