Slashdot Mirror
Bill Introduced To Require ID When Purchasing "Burner Phones" (house.gov)
insitus quotes a report from Speier.House.Gov: Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) introduced the Closing the Pre-Paid Mobile Device Security Gap Act of 2016, which would require people to present identification when purchasing "burner phones" and other pre-paid mobile devices, as well as requiring merchants to keep records of those purchases. "Burner phones" are pre-paid phones that terrorists, human traffickers, and narcotics dealers often use to avoid scrutiny by law enforcement because they can be purchased without identification and record-keeping requirements. This bill would close that legal gap.
"This bill would close one of the most significant gaps in our ability to track and prevent acts of terror, drug trafficking, and modern-day slavery," said Speier. "The 'burner phone' loophole is an egregious gap in our legal framework that allows actors like the 9/11 hijackers and the Times Square bomber to evade law enforcement while they plot to take innocent lives. The Paris attackers also used 'burner phones.' As we've seen so vividly over the past few days, we cannot afford to take those kinds of risks. It's time to close this 'burner phone' loophole for good."
The bill is going to be useless unless the used phone market is eliminated.
We need more laws. MORE MORE MORE. There will never be enough laws!
I mean, no-one has ever faked ID. Or paid a kid $20 to go buy a couple of phones.
And where will it end? ID to buy box-cutters to close the box-cutter loophole? ID to buy nails because they're used in nail bombs? ID to buy pressure cookers?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How about you make getting an ID free then?
It certainly seems to be increasingly required for just about everything these days....
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
How are burner phones any different than the pay phones of old?
NSA/CIA Gopher
I'm not afraid of terrorists (even though I live in a power point that they'd probably love to attack). The government, otoh, and don't give me that BS about "if you ain't got nothing to hide, you needn't worry". EVERYBODY has skeletons in their closets.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
Assuming he has an id.
Just off the top of my head the only problem I can see with this is it also precludes the possibility of someone being able to make an anonymous call. It's no longer the case that there are payphones everywhere, that you can call 911 for free from, or drop coins into the slot and make an anonymous call that way. If ID is required for a burn phone then for all intents and purposes all calls made can be traced back to the individual.
Can anyone else come up with valid reasons why a non-criminal, non-terrorist would need to make an anonymous phone call?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
... only outlaws will be anonymous?
These kinds of laws are utterly pointless and ineffective in preventing terrorism. They are, however, very effective means by which government can terrorize law abiding citizens, by going on legal fishing expeditions and blackmailing people with legal but embarrassing personal conduct.
.... this is a DEMOCRAT proposing this crap. As is Jim Cooper's (D-Elk Grove) smartphone "back door" (sic) bill
Some people just like the privacy. And there are legit reasons too, even if it's few. The below is about remaining anonymous when winning the lottery in certain states that don't allow it. I think it's more about making it harder for reporters and such regarding public records I guess. Maybe the person takes it to the extreme. Also, won't potential criminals just steal someone's phone or just buy a used cell from the black market? There are so few criminals compared to the used phone market, right? Also, if ID is required, what about people who are too poor to have ID? Not everyone drives. This is an actual problem in some states regarding minorities voting.
http://luckyyou.alecwest.com/
Not everybody. Some of us mash the bones up, mix them with clay and make sculptures with it. Or plates.
Ummm ... that's what, yeah, a guy said, who was on the creative writing course I took.
BRB, door.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
When was the last time a US government agency massacred dozens of people here in the US? When was the last time the cops went into a school or theater and shot dozens of folks?
I am SO TIRED of you anti-government idiots. I am NOT afraid of my government. I AM afraid of gun-loving idiot civilians in this country.
More people are killed by our government then by terrorists. Which is the bigger threat?
You know, for the children and because of terrorists and shit. Because before cellphones, absolutely NO ONE EVER stood by a payphone waiting for a call, usually from their counterpart calling from another payphone.
Democrat (party)
Yes, the "D" stands for authoritarian Dickhole. The more you know!
> When was the last time a US government agency massacred dozens of people
Last month, I suppose.
> here in the US?
In the US, I'm not sure when was the LAST time, but I sure remember when they did so a few miles down the road from me, in Waco.
> a school or theater and shot dozens of folks?
Ever notice those virtually always happen in "gun free" zones (aka defenseless victim zones)?
Seriously?! I thought that it was the Republican (Conservative) parties in the States that want to control everyone? Aren't the Democrats supposed to be The Good Guys (TM)?
Brown people just have no right to bomb us back. When we do it, we are doing our job. When they do it, it is a crime against humanity.
Democratic party. Democrat party is a slur popularized by Rush Limbaugh and his mouth breathing minions since apparently a study once suggested people associated the shortened form with the word "rat."
No shoes without ID and registration .....
FOR THE CHILDREN!
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Just because you are the owner or the person who bought the phone does not mean you are the one who is using it to make a call. Emergencies are an obvious issue, you do not have a phone and someone has been shot and they have a phone, but are incapacitated. Resale would also be a big problem. Would only licensed individuals be allowed to sell phones? Or if anyone can sell a phone, is the obligation to notify the government on the seller, the buyer or both? What about phone destruction? How is this notification to be done? Some people do not have telephones - Amish. What happens when a phone is lost? If notification is required when the phone is lost, what time period is required before it is considered lost? What happens when a phone is found? Are lost and found repositories now illegal? Does this require a creation transaction / tax? What identifies a physical phone? Counterfeit copies would proliferate. Who elected this idiot?
Lots more stolen phones, and phones smuggled from Mexico/Canada.
Seems to me that, while looking good on the surface, once you really start to think about it this is a bad idea.
It's shorthand for "Douchebag-San Francisco".
will be revisited as a means for terrorists to communicate.
Not that you'll ever hear of.
Another vague article. At least tell us who this "Bill" is, FFS!
Why were you under the impression that one side of The Party would work against the interests of the other side?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Draft text
https://www.govtrack.us/congre...
If you want to pass a law for its instrumental value, then you need make a case that it's actually going to work.
If this law works as intended, what would success look like? Maybe one of these things:
- Actually intercepting terrorists' communications before an attack?
- Actually intercepting terrorists' communications during an attack?
- Making it so terrorists can only communicate by ways other than cell phone during a terrorist attack?
- Making it so we can easily identify terrorists who used a cell phone during a terrorist attack after the attack is done?
Or something else I haven't thought of?
Are we already achieving any of those things by other means in some cases? If so, when aren't we, and would the law help us with that?
As background for figuring out if we will achieve our goal(s), let's get some more info about the world.
Currently terrorists purchase prepaid phones without ID and use them before and during terrorist attacks. If the proposed law was in effect, what would they do instead?
- Would they still be able to acquire a cellphone from a retailer without actually identifying themselves?
- Also, are there any other ways that a terrorist could obtain cellphones without identifying themselves?
If you want people to think up ideas about that you've probably come to the right place.
* Giving fake info to an online retailer
* Giving another person's info to an online retailer
* Paying an unrelated third party (e.g. a homeless person) to buy a phone and give it to them
* Stealing phones
Supposing that none of that worked and the terrorists lost access to anonymous phones, and they changed their practices, would they change them in a way that would achieve the goal?
When terrorists kill more people than choking on chicken wings, I'll be appropriately scared of them. 9/11 was a significant thing. And it was *entirely* resolved by 3 things. 1. reinforced/locked cockpit doors 2. Me. 3. You.
The old understood contract of just sit tight during a hijacking and get let off in Cuba or wherever was ripped to shreds as evidenced by Flight 93 in PA. NOBODY is going to sit idly by anymore.
I've always wondered about burner phones for this specific reason though. In a world where every 'number' should have a person assoc with it, it seems odd that it would be allowable to have completely anonymous phones able to be used. I understand the myriad of reasons why LOTS of people might want and legitimately need a burner phone, but that ability comes with societal costs such as people using them for 'bad' (TM) reasons; same obviously go's for crowbars and baseball bats.
A burner phone is a tool that can be used for good or ill and should we ban 'tools' simply because it can be abused? In most cases, I'm firmly in the 'no' category and deal with it. In this case, I'm conflicted...
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Killing dozens at once? And federal government only? Ok, it's reasonabl rare for the US government to kill lots of people at once here, have to go back to the Waco massacre for that one. It kills lots of people at once in other countries on a regular basis, of course.
Killing people one by one? And including state and local governments? Dude, have you somehow missed the recent uproar over police shootings? And it's nothing new, the War on (Some) Drugs has had cops killing people for decades.
If you're not afraid of the government, that's a sign that either 1) you're white and rich and of sufficient status that you're glad to have the state keep "those people" in line with deadly force, or 2) you don't have a clue what's going on.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
You live IN a power point?
Oh, I'm so sorry.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
And Diabetes kills more than all of them put together.
There is no Good Guys when talking about political big shots.
"Mr. President, we must not allow a burner phone gap!"
- General Turgidson
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
There are some pretty cheap Android tablets out there that can use apps like Skype over the Internet that aren't really phones. Just go to a place where there is an open Wi-Fi connection and talk away. Amazon was selling their Fire tablet for something like $25 awhile ago. Might even be cheaper than a phone. Are these banned in the proposed bill? You gotta have an ID to by a cheap tablet?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
"Sir, our records showed that you purchased ten burner phones that were used for..."
"Oh yea, those - damnedest thing, someone broke into my car and stole them. I have the police report and everything".
The end of anonymity is nigh though, it constantly ratchets tighter every day.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Then by terrorists what?
My AT&T phone, with unlimited text and data. $100 per month. Cash deposit;
get it back when you return my phone.
I mean, no-one has ever faked ID. Or paid a kid $20 to go buy a couple of phones.
That still gets you to the Point of Sale. Time and date of purchase. It may get you video of the buyer, copies of the fake ID, and so on. Do you still want to be the kid who fronts for the buyer of a burner phone? I can't say I like the odds.
Democratic party, not Democrat party
That's the reason for the D or R after the name: You literally cannot tell them apart without a score card any more (and haven't been able to for decades).
They all ultimately want the same thing: to go through your pockets for loose change they missed last time.
I noticed before sometimes in the United States when people want your government to control people more it says "D something" by their name. What does the D mean?
Abbreviation for party affiliation. So far I've seen:
D- Democrat
R- Republican
I- Independent (not affiliated with a major party - usually someone who lost a primary and ran anyway, sometimes someone who just ran without going through a party mechanism)
L- Libertarian
A- American Independent (historic: George Wallace's party from the '60s)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Uh, this may be because of something I said...
I called the decryption demand by the FBI stupid in front of her, and pointed out that all the Charlie Hebdo terrorists in the Paris attack coordinated with burner phones that they didn't use before or after the actual incident.
Perhaps she didn't get the fact that they didn't turn the phones in to the local "terrorist burner phone convenience dropbox" after the event?
Yes, you're absolutely correct: they don't massacre people in the same place at the same time. They do it individually.
Getting real tired of this meme.
"EVERYTHING I DON'T LIKE IS A """LOOPHOLE""""
Sure makes for some good fearmongering though.
When was the last time a US government agency massacred dozens of people here in the US?
Why would it be any worse when they do it in the US? They do it elsewhere all the time.
I am SO TIRED of you anti-government idiots. I am NOT afraid of my government.
You should be. They have lots of weapons and no-one is perfect, infallible and incorruptible 100% of the time.
That will only be an annoyance and privacy risk for upstanding citizens, while criminals will keep using phones which are not registered to them. SIM registration is required in many European countries, but of course you can still get cards without registering them or preregistered to other people, and you can still roam with cards from countries that don't have the registration requirement.
> I thought that it was the Republican (Conservative) parties in the States that want to control everyone?
If you actually thought that, Ronald Reagan defined the modern Republican party. One of his defining statements is:
âoeGovernment is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.â
He further explained:
âoeFrom time to time weâ(TM)ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?â
I've got a solution: Make diabetes illegal.
They KNOW there will still be so many loopholes that the scheme is yet another example of security theatre.
Making GUNS harder to get, ammunition harder to get, mandatory firearms licensing back ground checks will all do a LOT more to save lives than have ID checks for cellphones. But the politicians are more afraid of the NRA than the terrorists.
This is nothing more than a politician jumping up and down going look at me, I am doing something.
Take away privacy, take away encryption, take away all your civil liberties. All your privacies belong to us.
Look at how many people are killed.by police ever year in the US and get back to me. It's at anywhere from a 9x to 18x higher rate than other civilized nations.
For that matter, you're as likely to be killed by furniture as terrorists.
Yes, they should make it mandatory to have ID if you ever want to talk to another person. That will solve terrorism once and for all!
absolutely NO ONE EVER stood by a payphone waiting for a call
A absolutely agree with you, but...
When was the last time you saw a payphone on the street?
Unless it was an episode of Person of Interest where the plot requires having it.
People who need burner phones:
Corporate and government personnel who go to security conferences like DEFCON...
And in good part that is because of the prevalence of handguns in the US.
Nullius in verba
Seems to misunderstand that more "burner phones" are bought by battered women than by terrorists.
Why do you want to see battered women die, Jackie?
--
BMO
Phones used in Paris were acquired hours before the attacks. The terrorists most likely had no expectation of surviving. The suicide bombers in Paris and Brussels certainly didn't. So unless this information raises a flag with law enforcement immediately, identification is pointless. The next attack will be coordinated using phones purchased with proper identification. So the next step will be to provide law enforcement with real time subscriber information from the telecoms. And maybe a blacklist, like the TSA's no-fly list, of suspects not allowed to purchase phones. Maybe a five day waiting period as well.
Have gnu, will travel.
Ever heard of eBay? Ever heard of Craigs List? Ever heard of soliciting a young person to buy you a phone (this does work too- don't ask why I know this.. no I'm not a terrorist). There are also other means of communications like traditional radios. No central tower required. You can buy from China 5W radios and repeaters that extend a good 30 miles. The idea this will have any effect other than to drain our economic resources by creating more red tape and hinder the poor is nonsensical. We need to eliminate red tape like this for the good of the people. We probably kill more people by misappropriation of resources through red tape than if we just donated it directly to ending childhood hunger or curing some disease.
Has putting cold medicine behind the counter and requiring ID done anything to hinder drug abuse? I'll tell: No. It hasn't. And neither have most of these types of laws. Mexico has similar ID identification laws and do you know what happened on day one of the law? Thousands of people registered there phones in the name of the president of the country. This sort of thing doesn't work. Requiring ID for cigarettes, alcohol, and similar hasn't worked. Nor has prohibition of any kind. All any of these things do is increase the costs of doing business and hinder legal business from occurring.
We need to eliminate drivers licenses, license plates, vehicular registration, and other stupid laws that do little to nothing had protecting us. A license is not needed to drive a car, registration is not needed to drive a car, and neither is insurance. None of these things make us less safe. Insurance can't stop a collision and NH doesn't require insurance either. Vehicular registration does nothing to hinder vehicular theft and adds minor costs to owning a car. However added up all these things do make for significant waste of resources. While Colorado requires vehicular registration they only require it once for the life of the vehicle. Compare that to other states where it's required every year! This is nothing less than a tax.
If you want less government consider joining me and move to New Hampshire. I bought into the Free State Project and recently moved. While it took a year to make it happen for me its been well worth it. There have been lots of successes in the past couple years and 20,000 people have already agreed to move. Over 2,000 are here now. A few dozen of them are my neighbours in Keen, NH. Thousands of others are spread across the state (mostly the southern end though where it is warmer).
Which one should be used for Senator Binks of Naboo?
In Australia when you purchase and/or activate a SIM/Celluar service you must provide ID of one form or another. They accept government issue ID or a credit card number. It can be done in person, online or over the phone. We don't care about the device, just the celluar service. The data is not collected by the government but the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) which is and industry group with the members being our carriers, they also maintain the IMEI blacklist for phones reported stolen and all carriers subsribe to it, so a stolen phone can't be used on any Australian network
Admiral Trigger Happy
I was going to respond but i am being self-censored.
"A 'person' is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky animals and you know that."
With free public Wifi, your IP address can almost be used as a phone number. The internet is rapidly replacing the old phone network.
If you falsify your identifying information to buy a prepaid phone, this bill says you can be stuck in prison for up to FIVE YEARS. So if someone fucks up the documentation somewhere along the way you risk being thrown in prison. That's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay fucking overboard. Call your Congress critter NOW about this shit. This is 1984-grade overreach if ever there was any.
Beyond killing, en-mass or singly, they can throw you in jail, arrest and jail you, seize your possessions, real property, bank accounts, etc. Government agents can do that pretty much without fear of retribution or harm to their career on the flimsiest circumstance. Might you get out jail without an indictment or conviction? Or your property back? Perhaps, eventually, but there's likely to be a heavy cost.
but Phones do
Require everyone have identification to purchase a phone but don't require people to have identification to prove they are eligible to vote.
I don't know you but I'd still bet a ton of money on you not being in the "uses burner phone" camp. Easy to feel "conflicted" when you aren't in the affected group.
... but it takes a Democrat to perform the cigar in coochie trick inside the Oval Office
How much more wonderful can that be, eh?
And in good part that is because of the prevalence of handguns in the hands of authority.
FTFY
Let's hope the miracle of 3D printing will eventually preclude any regulation of who can have a phone.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Or an ego!
> "Burner phones" are pre-paid phones that terrorists, human traffickers, and narcotics dealers
... and normal law abiding citizens who don't need their rectal cavities searched whenever they dare glance outside their curtains.
J-Naboo, natch.
Burner CB Radio sets. Easy enough to get a hold of, cost parity with cell phones. Available at every store that carries toys.
Once those get tracked they'll move on to HAM radio.
Especially with IPv6...we will miss NAT!
Problem solved.
The one thing you need upon arriving at a new country is a phone. No phone means no job, no craigslist, no finding a place to live... vital things for immigrants.
Many countries in Europe know this, and banned the use of burner phones a long time ago. I discovered this while backbacking around, and deciding to buy a sim card to avoid paying extortion fees for roaming.... and very quickly I found that "legit" (think Tesco) places would deem my foreign passport "insuficient" as form of ID and would not sell me a prepaid phone/card.
Many US people know this too, and are just looking for an excuse to put control over this issue... they can't say it is for immigration, that would be racist. But terrorists! And child porn! And exploding kittens! Yea, that would do it.
Italy goes to the extreme of keeping a copy of your passport for allowing you to use the internet on an internet café.... ohh no passport? no internet for you!
Usually the deal for many immigrants is to get the phones from nondescript shops in immigrant neighborhoods.... and those won't cease to exist, because, well, there are literally millions of illegal but paying subscribers giving money to cell providers.
I noticed before sometimes in the United States when people want your government to control people more it says "D something" by their name.
Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the news from states like Georgia, Indiana, and Kansas. When those people want the government to control people more, it says "R something" by their name.
There are a lot of authoritarians in both major American political parties. It's our duty to vote for (or against) individuals, not parties.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Free public WiFi assigns you an arbitrary IP address. I guess we could all stab away at random IP addresses and maybe reach our friend, if they're in range of a WiFi access point....
Though this is a touch better than hearing moronic politicians attempting to get involved in the phony-anyway encryption stack we've been left with, I'd still much prefer messy death by terrorism any day over a world where any portion of our government has any say over any portion of my electronics aside from what (puny, inadequate, unfairly distributed) sliver of the frequency spectrum my device gets to use - as this refereeing is necessary to a minor degree in the way that functioning traffic lights are a necessity...
Choice of words here are bold and telling.
Answer me this latest-annoying-politician-likely-lacking-adequate-experience-to-offer-tech-commentary-and-who-is-about-to-raise-the-cost-of-my-next-phone: in what way/s is an American who spends their hard-earned money to purchase a telephone and then proceeds to use it to make PRIVATE calls taking advantage of a loophole??? Sounds like you feel entitled to something, what precisely is that something ma'am?
It sounds to me like you ma'am are a much larger and more persistent threat to my American values and way of life than all of ISIS combined. Hopefully the government is doing it's diligence by tracking your every move with a warrant-less Stingray deployment, and storing the data in a sloppy manner whereby your next political opponent can easily put it to use by airing your dirty laundry in a thorough enough manner that neither you nor your loved ones can comfortably show your faces in the light of day for some time.
Otherwise I fear our government is not doing its part to close the loophole that allows you a voice in any matter anywhere.
eBay is and always has been 100% traceable. Somebody trying to be anonymous via eBay or any major online retailer isn't all that smart.
I don't respond to AC's.
Burners don't work. I recall an article, which I think was on slashdot, about government agencies using calling "fingerprints" to match people against boxes of burners. In that specific case they were after drug dealers. The only way your burner will actually give you anonymity is if you call someone you don't normally call and then get rid of it. It's fine for a whistleblower calling WaPo once and then ditching the mobile, but if you think you're going to retain your anonymity by switching prepaid phones every month while you make the same calls to the same people from the same geographic locations, you're crazy.
time to cull society of anti-american fascists
So I think the terrorists were also found to be breathing air anonymously. They were also wearing shoes. They were allowed to speak without having a microphone implanted in their heads.
Yes I'm afraid this is another stupid politician that can't help the problem.
You're more likely to be killed by your own toddler with your own gun than be killed by terrorists.
It's a burner because you only use it once. By the time they know it exists it's too late to wiretap it or track. It's the one-time pad of telecommunications.
Yes, ID requirements would possibly make roving wiretaps more effective if you're monitoring all purchases in real-time (record-keeping isn't going to help there). Assuming they're not trivially easy to circumvent.
At that point we'll be keeping better track of phone purchases than gun purchases.
Remember kids, guns don't kill people, phones kill people.
Different day, same old bullshit line from the progressive propaganda playbook. The reason for the 2nd amendment is to give the people the ability to overthrow a tyrannical government. Read the Federalist papers, read the Declaration of Independence, read memoirs and biographies. Nowhere do they say it's for only an army, or because they hate the army, or anything else you want to pull out of your ass as a fairy tale. Tyranny is a repeating theme throughout all of written history, you should really spend time learning and repeating history instead of propaganda.
The founders were extremely intelligent, each studied Political Philosophy and contributed to the creation and method of maintaining a Republic. All of the "They never saw this one coming." is pure bullshit. Just because you are a sucker that fell for the lines does not mean other people should be tricked into that way of thinking.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
When they buy the phones hours before the attack it will be completely pointless. Yet another win for terrorists as this will likely prevent nothing related to terrorism whatsoever.
You SHOULD be worried in exactly the same way.
Because if you don't get up off your ass and stop this train REAL FUCKING SOON,
the minute you even THINK about discussing political thoughs about your govt/nsa/whatever,
they will swoop down on your phone and internets like stink they dont wanna hear on shit,
and haul your freethought ass straight to gitmo where you will die rendered terrorist style.
I'm going to have to convince homeless people and drug addicts to buy burned phones to prop up my criminal empire. Oh well, it's not really going to stop me.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
They've cameras on all the payphones I see. What payphones are left.
What, there won't be a market in straw man purchases? You'd think?
You'd need to eliminate a lot more than just the used phone market. Here is a simpler option: Identity fraud or even coerced phone-with-plan buying. That already happens here (NW Europe), and that while prepaids don't need to be registered. It's no different in neighbouring countries where prepaids do need to be registered. Registering makes no difference whatsoever. The scamming works remarkably well for the perps even though in the second case the victim is right there, being coerced up close and personally in front of a store clerk.
The upside for the perp are the "free" minutes, and for the shiny phone you get with the contract to use or sell (notice: no stolen blocking!), leaving the victim with endless collector visits and credit ratings shot all to hell. Over here, identity documents are hard to forge, but very easy to abuse all the same: All you need is a copy of somebody else's document. And those copies abound because you need'em for bloody everything. (Astute readers will notice that hard-to-forge identity documents are no panacea.) And even if that was somehow fixed, well, I just said people get coerced in person to enter into phone contracts, didn't I?
The thing with these "terrorists" is that they aren't lone wolves. They have extensive support networks, since their creed, shared with many people, requires to support one another for the cause--spreading the creed by any means necessary, any means at all. We have millions of them (easily over 10% of the total population), so no silly law is going to stop them. Plenty of willing and able straw men, and as we've just seen, that option isn't exhaustive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If you don't think it could happen, history says otherwise.
"Powers. I have them."
Why? Corporations have numbers. Election campaigns have numbers. Maybe Santa can have a number. Having said that, we still tend to have a person assoc with each number regardless (as the one who pays the bill). But I don't see an intrinsic reason for that, unlike say PO boxes. Which leads to...
Then being able to mail anything must scare you shit-less. Perhaps you heard of the Unibomber? Or the Anthrax Scare? You can do a lot worse with great levels of anonymity outside burner phones and we don't see a call for ID for every letter. Meanwhile, it's trivial to abuse another person's mailbox or a central mailbox. And generally, like burner phones, there'd be loopholes no matter the laws and obviously criminals (like drug dealers) aren't going to bat an eye at it.
No, seriously, there's no real reason to be conflicted. This is a stupid idea.
PS - Seriously, the whole serious of attacks in Europe lately? Precisely the ones people on /. were predicting since 9/11 and the TSA became a thing. The stupidity then isn't that there was an attack but that people act surprised and at all terrorized by it. No, we need to accept terrorism as the new normal and just go about our business. Not block immigrants from a war zone or ban burner phones. Just do our best to track down murders like we should be doing anyways.
How about a VoIP device on an open wireless connection, with a spoofed MAC address of course.
Steal a laptop and Skype at McD's, would you like fries with that international terrorism happy meal.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
The informant Deep Throat needed anonymity. He was part of a corrupt system but felt a need to speak out, while remaining part of a corrupt system.
To all those who say "yeah but...", just remember official wrongdoing. It's way more of a problem than all of our terrorist problems put together. When the system itself is corrupt then there's no end to the damage it can cause. And all systems can become corrupt even if they didn't start out that way.
If you doubt that, take a look at any dictatorial country, on any continent. Either current or past, it does not matter. Principled and freedom-loving citizens get ruthlessly put down by any means necessary. That's the danger, even if the example is on the extreme side of what can happen.
The terrorists and criminals adapt faster than you can say "whack-a-mole."
Whether it's burner phone, encrypted phones, pressure cookers, or whatever is tapped 3 times with a magic wand to prevent them from using it, they will quickly find a way around the restrictions, or move on to something else to achieve their aims.
All this does is further inconvenience the rest of us. All this really is is theater to get some politco mentioned in the media.
Backlash on slashdot was inevitable, and that is perhaps a good thing. Thankfully, people who care about privacy and freedom still exist.
But here's the thing: Where I live, to get a phone (by which I really mean a SIM), prepaid or postpaid, requires submission of documents with ID proof, address proof,, etc. The telco carries out verification and only when all conditions are met are SIMs given out and the connections activated. It hasn't really hurt anyone and has made sure that any phone used for any terrorist activity can be traced back to some address.
My country has been hit by terrorism long before US or Europe were. And regularly. Mobiles made communication much easier for the perpetrators, enabled them to hide better. So the govt put in place these rules, found gaps, closed them, and so on over the course of a decade. You even have to show ID in cybercafes here, and name, address and phone numbers are recorded by the cafe owner should they be required later for investigation.
Today, it is mighty tough to get a phone fraudulently. Phones can be stolen. But stolen phones can quickly be blocked too. All you have to do is inform the telco. You could use fraudulent ID and address proofs, but then, verification would hold your connection up. Or getting verification marked successful will require the connivance of multiple people. All of this raises the degree of difficulty to acquire a so--called 'burner' connection.
Having lived in this regime for so long, I don't really see it as a big issue. You don't switch between operators regularly and so there should be no need to go through the rigmarole all that much. What the US seems to be proposing is in fact quite lax compared to here in India.
That was an interesting post.
I too kind am kinda moderate about guns. On the one hand, I've done my research. Various gun laws have been enacted in various places, and we have the statistics to see what the results are. We don't have to predict what the results might be, we have the numbers. The facts show, unequivocally, that gun bans and strict gun laws are correlated with an increase in violent crimes, and a large increase in sexual assault and rape. That's just a fact- when politicians remove womens' ability protect themselves, many more women get raped. (I can provide a link to full statistics from official government sources , and further explanation, upon request) .
On the other hand, at one time in my life I decided that it would be best for me to not have handguns in my house. Mostly because I had two curious young children in the house, and we lived in a safe neighborhood.
The Constitution guarantees me ten essential rights and the right to make that choice about guns is one of them.
As far as laws go, I did find one thing that was proven effective ; actually a combination of two things. First, Texas added a minimum mandatory sentence for using a weapon in the commission of a felony, then they ADVERTISED it widely, with ads on city busses, billboards, etc. Word got around that robbery would get you five years, having a gun on you when you got caught would get you an additional ten years in the slammer. That worked.
After that was successful, Texas ran a similar advertising campaign about their concealed carry law. Law-abiding citizens might now shoot back, the ads warned. Thinking of robbing a store? You don't know which of the customers behind you is packing a .45. That also worked, though probably not as well as advertising the mandatory sentence for using a weapon in the commission of a felony.
If you think about it, it makes sense. Billions of dollars have been spent figuring out how to create ads which effectively influence people's behavior. If you want to influence the behavior of thugs in your city, it makes sense to leverage that knowledge.
Ps, what was the gun in the closet? A slug gun? An old 50 caliber smooth bore ball gun?
open the stolen phone market.
Don't these shrubs think this shit through?
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
It is easier to track a small number of unregistered phones than a large number of registered ones and they could not even track the smaller number.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Oh good, the terrorists can't get a burner phone - but they can still go to a gunshow and buy a pistol or semi automatic without one.
Midnight Massacre (Salina, Utah), July 8 1945: 9 prisoners of war executed by an Army private.
Twin Peaks (Waco, Texas), May 2015: unknown of 9 deaths by Waco PD.
Fort Hood, April 2014: rogue Specialist killed 3 before eating his own gun.
Washington Navy Yard, September 2013: Navy contractor fatally shot twelve.
Information on the Yemen situation is being fully suppressed by Western media.
Information on Syria is spotty at best.
You're welcome.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
uh, no, it's because the police in the US are inariably armed to the teeth and packing ammunition that can crack an engine block.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
you're more likely to be killed by tobacco than by pretty much any other cause.
Let's outlaw tobacco. Hm?
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Trivial. They'll get burners issued by their agency/company. To keep liability down, they'd probably require its return after the conference.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Trivial with p2p technology. Connect to a busy, public tracker, put up your public key encrypted packet, eventually both hookup with sweet AES encryption. It probably should be done now, just to get around the metadata collection.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Like police in other countries don't carry guns? WTF?
there is one at the end of my road. Less than 100 yards away.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
It seems to me that to keep a low profile you only have a single conversation of limited time. So this bill is essentially going to "try" and prevent perhaps a few dozen conversations from occurring out of the billions that occur each day??? Seriously, this is the best that our leaders can do...create yet another law. I guess when the only tool you have is legislative, then everything becomes solvable by a law.
Unfortunately, there will always be those who will take themselves out along with others, and do so against the others' will. It's happened for centuries and it will continue to happen. We have become so adept at destroying one another that pretty soon there will only be the lions and the ants, and guess which one will survive. When destruction is your only path then you will cease to exist well before time will take you.
how are they going to get the info on who bought dozens of cheap phones from the grey market in shenzen ?
that would be (G)ungan.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
And require ID to get it!
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
You're also more likely to be killed by lightening, if you live in the US or Europe.
I'm not so sure about sharks. I've had some trouble finding reliable statistics.
There are other choices.
They are exactly the same. Pigs are state terrorists.
Stand up for gun control rights, lemme tell ya. You'll need them. I wish I had them, if I did I would buy as many weapons and ammo that I could and go pig hunting.
Gun down all cops and military thugs before they kill you.
Assassinate all politicians - Trump, Obama, HIllary -- kill them all and leave none alive.
I'm not conflicted at all, you yuppie scum -- I believe you and your family would make great target practice. No less than you and your serpent, murderous kind deserve. Fucking die.
You mean like in 2015? Evidence mounts that poisoned Flint water caused deaths
I would assume that you wouldn't want to ban burners because the set of burners is smaller than the set of all cell phones. I don't know if this is possible, but I would also assume that in their quiet, money-grubbing and totalitarian-enabling way, the telecommunications companies would be able to provide a list of IMEIs and other identifying features associated with "burners".
Basically, it wouldn't seem to hard for the surveillance state to obtain all the information necessary to scrutinize burner devices, which means they can use fewer resources scanning the larger pool of non-burner devices.
Ban burners, and you've prevented the people you want to monitor from self-sorting themselves into a smaller pool by using burners.
Supports any and all assaults on the privacy, freedom, and anonymity of US citizens, including regulation of inanimate THINGS they might buy and use for perfectly legal and legitimate reasons .... but then supports open borders and giving official state ID cards (California driver's licenses) to illegal aliens who enter the country with no documents and therefore no actual identification.
If this were to become law, the following is GUARANTEED to happen: People in politically-protected classes will come forward to insist that THEY need these things, so the Democrats who pushed this will then carve-out loopholes to let the protected class bypass the restriction. Battered women avoiding their batterers, Hollywood people avoiding stalkers, members of sexual minority groups seeking anonymity, and yes - Muslims fearing persecution will all get exceptions.
The need to add a "loophole" to a law is the first clue that the law itself is wrong.
Bad guys will just pay an idoit to buy there pre paid phones.
Legitimate users on the other hand will have to pay for the extra checks.
just add provision for the gentlemen with urgent need for a drink or another "shot" and he will buy for you a phone or two.
Yesterday somebody shot in Belgium nuclear power plant employee to get his access badge.
It is dark future for those vulnerable pedestrians toting phones. Think about children!
Indeed, double edged sword.
When it comes to buying a new phone, it means that staff in political offices will no longer be anonymous when tipping off newspapers. Those text message from a new phone number will be traceable back to a person that the NSA can identify...
And when the congressman wants a hooker or drugs, if they're bought with a new phone, that too will no longer be "anonymous." The NSA will know.
Meetings between people will no longer be anonymous when organized by cell phones.
I wonder if Capitol Hill has put all the piece of the puzzle together about what it means for them... ... or if there will be a resurgence in the demand for pay phones in Washington DC?
I've always wondered about burner phones for this specific reason though. In a world where every 'number' should have a person assoc with it, it seems odd that it would be allowable to have completely anonymous phones able to be used. I understand the myriad of reasons why LOTS of people might want and legitimately need a burner phone, but that ability comes with societal costs such as people using them for 'bad' (TM) reasons...
I've always wondered about cash for this specific reason though. In a world where every 'person' should have a bank assoc with them, it seems odd that it would be allowable to have cash money transactions able to be used. I understand the myriad of reasons why LOTS of people might want and legitimately need cash, but that ability comes with societal costs such as people using them for 'bad' (TM) reasons...
I hope you see where your argument is easily led. I'm assuming you want a future Utopia where privacy is made illegal for every citizen, while the excuses for the evisceration of privacy rage on...
France, where the phones used by the Paris attackers were bought, already requires ID when buying a SIM.
So, in order to "close one of the most significant gaps in our ability to track and prevent acts of terror," this guy wants to bring in a measure that didn't "prevent acts of terror".
Dummy.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
How does it get around the metadata collection? Surely your public key is too much metadata, even if it doesn't come associated with a name?
EVERYBODY has skeletons in their closets.
I HATE this argument. You don't need skeletons in your closet for someone to have power over you with the knowledge they gain about your personal information.
Hey, I like your sig. That is all.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
R - loose privileges below the waist.
I would think this requirement would have been tried before, except using drugs as the reason. Anyone remember previous bills in the US Congress?
You can say that about some governments, maybe (see other replies for counter-arguments), but here's the thing:
Add up all the people who have been killed in atrocities committed by non-government entities that you want: individuals, terrorist groups, rebel scum, etc. They will always be vastly outnumbered by those killed by governments, period. I'll even spot you all of human history up to the beginning of the 20th Century. It isn't even close.
You want to be safe? Giving more power to the government is not the answer. The government will always tell you that they can keep you safe if they just had the ability to do this one more thing. But they're lying (or stupid (or both)), because the fact is they can't protect you. There is always someone crazier out there who will get around whatever rules we put in place. Then the government will again ask for more power, because this one more thing would have stopped them.
You know what really keeps you and I safe? That most people are good. That the person standing next to you on the subway platform won't just push you onto the tracks as the train is coming for no particular reason. Is there a chance they might suddenly might give you a shove? Sure, but you don't worry about it, because it's so unlikely.
Am I saying that you should fear your government? No. But I am saying that you should be wary of giving the government more power. Most people are good, so let them be free.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
$50 fine for Authorized Sellers
"imprisoned for not more than 2 years or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both" for Unauthorized Sellers
This legislation brought to you by the letters: S, T, VZ, and AAPL
The politicians forgot that anything can get passed just so long as you promote it as being "for the safety of the kids".
They need to get the word out that only pedophiles, kidnappers and rapists use "burner phones" and then everyone will rally around the bill passage because they don't want some creep calling their child using a "burner phone".
Remember when pseudofed was over the counter? Now you have to stand in line, present ID, and have records kept. It's how we wiped the meth epidemic out. I mean once you had those registration requirements, the whole meth problem went away! Why, addiction to meth went down the very next day and has been virtually eradicated all by that one simple legislative trick! So now we'll just apply that problem to terrorism! Instant! presto-chango! Pass a law and poof! No more problem.
This is like throwing bacon at a wall. Sure it makes a slapping sound and sticks to the wall for a while, but in the end, the wall gets a greasy stain and the bacon is plain wasted.
Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons
Dumbfuck.
Fake IDs can be used to purchase prepaid mobile devices.
Good old fashioned communication WITHOUT cell phones. Cell phones are not a prerequisite for enabling of ciminal/spy/terrorist activity.
The fact that we had to have a standing army to both win a revolution and defend ourselves right at the end of that war just means that Jefferson was overruled. Just like many of the founders didn't want slavery to be legal and were forced to compromise. Many to most wanted no taxes at all at the Federal level, and that was not successful either.
You can absolutely cherry pick lots of "but that one guy said" statements, but as I said above the founders were far above average intelligence. They understood that certain ideals are far too Utopian (no standing Army, no taxes) to have any real world value. They all figured out the best compromises they could make at the time (allowing the citizens arms so that they could fight the Government if needed). The standing Army was small because civilians would fight an invader just like the standing Army.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Why not, we used to have a pole tax. That was for peopel to pay tax in ordar to vote. It was like that for years. I didnt effect free speach, at all. Niether does the regiuring of id for buner phones effect free speach or villated privecy lause.
Having weak defense is better than having none at all. The purpose is still the same, and your poor rationalization does not change it. Winning does not require that all the soldiers on a battle field get killed, and it never has.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Let's look at numbers before and after the change. In the chart you linked to, all the crimes are on the same chart, so the scale in such that you can't see most of the crime categories at all. Here are the numbers in tabular form, linked from the page you linked to:
http://www.aic.gov.au/dataTool...
We see that in the three years before (1993-1995), there were 38,007 sexual assaults. In the three years after, 43,741. So 5,734 more women sexually assaulted. Do you think that's a good thing, or a bad thing? Personally, I prefer that women NOT be raped, so I support policies that decrease, not increase, rapes.
Can anybody say for a fact whether they have this kind of regulation in France or Belgium?
My guess is that ID most likely is required, seeing how ID seems to required for almost everything in much of Europe. If so, doesn't seem to have hindered the Paris & Brussels terrorists from reportedly buying entire cases of burner phones.
One of the more clear examples was the UK gun ban. Official crime rate data (linked below) indicates that in the five years prior to the ban, 1.2 million violent crimes were reported. After the ban took effect, there were over 5 million violent crimes in the following five years. Home Office data shows that rape went from 27,000 to nearly 47,000 when potential attackers were assured there was no risk that a law-abiding woman might defend herself with a firearm. Other serious crimes show the same pattern. Total sex offenses increased from 158,000 to over 245,00.
For more examples and analysis ( and accompanying advertising campaigns) which did work, see this analysis:
https://docs.google.com/docume...
Raw data:
UK Home Office. A summary of recorded crime data from 1898 to 2001/02.
https://www.gov.uk/government/...
UK Home Office. Recorded crime statistics for England and Wales 2002/03 â" 2013/13.
https://www.gov.uk/government/...
Democrats insist that it's unfair to make people show ID when voting, because it's totally unfair to poor people and minorities.
Democrats ALSO now insist you DO have to show ID when buying a prepaid cell phone, in case of terrorists. Who buys the large bulk of prepaid phones? Poor people and minorities.
In another post in this same thread, someone disagreeing with me linked to some Australia data. In my reply I pointed out that the numbers on the site he linked to show sexual assault increased about 20% after the Australia law was passed. Again that's based on number linked from an anti-gun person trying to prove me wrong.
Another of the more clear examples was the UK gun ban. Official crime rate data (linked below) indicates that in the five years prior to the ban, 1.2 million violent crimes were reported. After the ban took effect, there were over 5 million violent crimes in the following five years. Home Office data shows that rape went from 27,000 to nearly 47,000 when potential attackers were assured there was no risk that a law-abiding woman might defend herself with a firearm. Other serious crimes show the same pattern. Total sex offenses increased from 158,000 to over 245,00.
For more examples, analysis, and a pair of laws (with accompanying advertising campaigns) which did work, see this analysis:
https://docs.google.com/docume...
Raw data:
UK Home Office. A summary of recorded crime data from 1898 to 2001/02.
https://www.gov.uk/government/...
UK Home Office. Recorded crime statistics for England and Wales 2002/03 - 2013/13.
https://www.gov.uk/government/...
If drug dealers, and people smugglers, and terrorists are such a problem then stop pussy footing around and just kill them all.
If not then fuck off you bunch of control freaks. People like you should have been smothered in the crib.
Cash doesn't track your location or give you communication at distance. There's an tangential argument about cash vs digital currency but it's not the same. And to my actual question... Cash is worth the societal costs of the bad (TM) things that can be done with it. Still conflicted...
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
I've long thought this is just another example of a push by government to use cell phones as a defacto method of Soviet-style "citizen registration". Even now, every shitty social media site requires a cell phone "verification" of your account, even if you've been using the sites for years. The fact that they're so incredibly pushy about it even when there's no legitimate need to be so, implies there's a hidden agenda behind it.
Imagine, back then, being legally required to present an id every time you made a call on a payphone.
That's how fucking dumb this shit is.
"Aren't the Democrats supposed to be The Good Guys (TM)?"
Actually d and r are two sides of a ratcheting mechanism.
Most phones now have biometric readers for unlocking device.
Soon phone companies will require a biometric scan (that matches account holder who scans their minutia data when they get assigned their SIM) in order to PLACE calls. Phone switch compares local scan to stored copy of biometric and bob's your uncle.
This will be next. Burner phone will be thing of the past.
People will instead go after insecure computers and use them to relay skype calls, etc.
People who need burner phones: anyone who advertises anything for sale on Craigslist or in the newspaper
punishing the masses in order to grab a few bad men, OR, easier "tracking" of specific demographics.
Because everyone is up to something
Jackie Spear says requiring ids in other contexts are racist. https://capac-chu.house.gov/pr.... Why not here?
Why have 1 person driving a backhoe when you could employ 20 with shovels?
It is pronunced "Diabetus" . Just ask Wilford Brimely
No we won't. If you think your hiding because of NAT your don't understand the internet. Internet has not and never was anonymous on its own. And IPv6 offers something better than NAT (isp or your local lan). But it is not anonymous either. Much of my internet life has been on static IP, a simple reverses name lookup and you could get the phone number of my desk phone. No big deal.
The internet is *not* anonymous, and NAT does not make you anonymous. For reference see how many of anonymous keep getting arrested!
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Regarding your point #2, as you mentioned they reported both ways for a couple of years specifically in order to see how much effect the new reporting would have. The new numbers are about 30% higher than the old. Remember that number - the new rules account for a 30% increase, based on the numbers you posted. (Home Office says a 14% increase, but it turns out that it doesn't matter). In the five years prior, 1.2 million violent crimes were reported. After the ban took effect, there were over 5 million violent crimes in the following five years. That's WAY more than the 30% increase attributable to the change in reporting.
> You mentioned the 5 years before and after the ban
I've found that for me to get at the truth of things, rather than simply finding ways to support my preconceived guess, it's best for me to FIRST define the measurements that seem reasonable, THEN look at the numbers. If I look at the numbers and start selecting some after I know what they are, I'll select ones that I "like", for conscious or subconscious reasons.
> but I'm going to widen that range a bit, from 1981 (chosen because it represents a local minimum) up to 2014/15. ... I realize that I only chose one column, but I didn't cherry pick
You did, however, cherry pick the years - you looked at the data first, then decided to start with the lowest number as the first number, in order to create an upward trend.
> In the entire decade from 2003 to 2013, there was no significant increase in TSO.
So crime didn't keep on increasing more and more forever. That tells us that it's not that crime keeps going up every year, no matter what. Rather, it increased around the time the gun laws were passed, then remained at that (higher) level.
I worded it poorly when I said you "decided to start with the lowest number as the first number, in order to create an upward trend". That sounds like it was intentional, which isn't necessarily the case.
By picking a local minimum as the starting point, that will always create the appearance of an upward trend. Whether or not you realized that when you chose a local minimum as your starting point I don't know. But that is of course the definition of a local minimum - that if you start at that point, you'll definitely go up from there. In other words, starting at a local minimum will ALWAYS make it appear as if the trend is upward.
More people are killed by our government then by terrorists.
So people are getting killed TWICE? Explain, please. Or are you illiterate?
We must close the Diabetus loophole!
The empowered are going about this all wrong. If they really want to gain the upper hand in the war on terrorism the same assumptions should be made as is always the case when building a defense: assume you are under attack.
To this end, assume everyone is the attacker. Enforce this mentality by making everything illegal - regardless of what it is - and dictate that those charged with an illegal act prove their innocence. If you can't prove innocence, you're a terrorist.
Who needs 10,000 laws when 1 will suffice?
Keep It Simple Stupid.
People elected to public office usually have NO technical knowledge. But technology is popular and they often like to pretend that they know something.
For several years now, one has had to provide government issued ID (Driving license, or income tax account card) to purchase a mobile connection. The handset doesn't matter as much as the SIM card (and is an issue in the US probably because operator provided & subsidized handsets are the norm) Not that it has deterred terrorists much.
"..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
So, no evidence at all, then..?
http://prepaid-data-sim-card.w... Finland seems very reasonable. Check out the others.