Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

U.S. Justice Department Accused of Using Fake Cell Towers on Planes to Gather Data From Phones

danielsutton said:
Law enforcement agencies still need to get court warrants before they can conduct this kind of surveillance, so it is not like our constitutional rights are being violated.
Click to expand...

I don't see anywhere in the article where a warrant is needed for this. They are not searching your phone for your data, as they are going through an intermediary. If anything, the 4th Amendment wouldn't apply, as all they would need to do is get a subpoena from the phone companies to use their towers. Nothing more.


foofan said:
our enemies don't have borders anymore. if it means capturing the next terrorist and their cell, go for it. I'm not doing anything wrong, so i'm not worried
Click to expand...

Martin Niemöller was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

He was best known for the following quote:

Martin Niemöller said:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Click to expand...

Just because you aren't doing anything wrong doesn't mean you should be complicit in what is happening. That type of non-action implies that you also condone it.

BL.
 
richardsonrs said:
Since I am not doing anything wrong there is no need for that.. see how that works? Without probable cause they can't do that. With probable cause they can anyway whether you like it or not so...
Click to expand...

Did you even read the article?

"The technology is aimed at locating cellphones linked to individuals under investigation by the government, including fugitives and drug dealers, but it collects information on cellphones belonging to people who aren't criminal suspects, these people said. They said the device determines which phones belong to suspects and "lets go" of the non-suspect phones."

Policeman: "Oh, I'm sorry I kicked in your door. I wasn't sure which door belonged to the suspected bad guy, so I had to kick in everyone in the building's door. Carry on. BTW: Nice boxer shorts."
 
As cool as this admittedly is, it's amazing how so many people here have absolutely no problem with a government agency freely being able to access personal text/voice conversations.

Just because you have "nothing to hide." Umm, how about your privacy?

Or is that not important? Agreeing to have a Gmail account and it scanning your messages for targeted ads is one thing, but having a plane fly overhead and swoop up data, ESPECIALLY when there is no probable cause against you, is concerning.

I would wager that maintaining the privacy of an innocent individual is more important than busting a drug dealer selling weed to a bunch of High School kids.
 
So it looks like the only way to avoid being tracked is to turn off your cell phone.
 
danielsutton said:
Law enforcement agencies still need to get court warrants before they can conduct this kind of surveillance, so it is not like our constitutional rights are being violated.
Click to expand...

What kind of a warrant covers the scanning of thousands of phones and recording data? When you wiretap someone legally, you must specify who and why.
 
richardsonrs said:
Since I am not doing anything wrong there is no need for that.. see how that works? Without probable cause they can't do that. With probable cause they can anyway whether you like it or not so...
Click to expand...

They likely do this without probable cause. SCOTUS has pretty much eviscerated the probable cause requirement for many types of searches.
 
jeblis said:
If you're not doing anything wrong then I suppose you don't mind letting police into your home and letting them search your phone, email and hard drives. Shouldn't be a problem. You're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to hide.
Click to expand...

LOL. there is nothing on my hard drives, but if thats the way you think makes me wonder whats on yours
 
rdlink said:
Did you even read the article?

"The technology is aimed at locating cellphones linked to individuals under investigation by the government, including fugitives and drug dealers, but it collects information on cellphones belonging to people who aren't criminal suspects, these people said. They said the device determines which phones belong to suspects and "lets go" of the non-suspect phones."

Policeman: "Oh, I'm sorry I kicked in your door. I wasn't sure which door belonged to the suspected bad guy, so I had to kick in everyone in the building's door. Carry on. BTW: Nice boxer shorts."
Click to expand...

Quite a bit different but OK whatever you say.
 
If anyone really believes the data collected from non-targets is actually "let go", you are incredible naïve.
 
I just finished several seasons of HBO's The Wire. Great show. The subject of this thread is the next logical extension. It could have been season 6.
 
I like the two articles posted back to back that show the government's hypocrisy. First they question Apple about the watch and it keeping health data private, then they actively gather information on people illegally. How nice.
 
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
 
richardsonrs said:
Since I am not doing anything wrong there is no need for that.. see how that works? Without probable cause they can't do that. With probable cause they can anyway whether you like it or not so...
Click to expand...

This statement might be considered probable cause :p

----------
foofan said:
our enemies don't have borders anymore. if it means capturing the next terrorist and their cell, go for it. I'm not doing anything wrong, so i'm not worried
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that buddy ;)
 
If you've nothing to hide why should anyone mind…

…walking around naked and handing out fliers with all their personal health records, financial details and the whereabouts of all family members, at all times to anyone nearby.

That said this is not surprising, or even the worst of this kind of thing. With proper oversight it could be reasonable in some cases - but it should have proper due process involved.. like be granted by a judge. I'm in the UK and I'm sure the same stuff happens here. It's a fine balance to get right, but personally I think the pendulum swung way too far in favour of destroying human rights in the name of 'protecting the public' after 9/11 (perhaps understandably initially) and it's never swung back far enough in terms of accountability and protecting the better of the values I think most of us would say our countries are supposed to stand for.
 
Privacy issues aside - What I don't understand is why we communicate things like this. If this is truly to 'catch the bad guys' why on earth do we put this out there.

Hey bad guy - here is the technology we are using and where we are using it. Here is how it works and what we do with the data. Nothing to see here, don't mind us.
 
Radio said:
This seems excessive

I often wonder if this sort of surveillance was inevitable post 9/11 or not.

Yet people will be okay with this because fear drives this.
Click to expand...

9/11 really has minimal bearing.

Even back in 1993 the Clinton admin lobbied hard to have the Clipper chip installed in every PC to give the U.S. govt a backdoor to encrypted data. It failed before the chip become obsolete, but that was well before 9/11.

Once could argue 9/11 gave gov'ts a stronger hand, but gov'ts have been in the surveillance business since there have been gov'ts. This story published today gets yawns not because of "fear" but because of 1) who is in the White House and 2) surveillance fatigue

I imagine if the story was published in the NYT in 2006 a few more eyebrows might be raised here. Recall when the ATT/NSA phone tapping program came to light in 2005. NSA's mission is the same though no matter who is in the WH or world or U.S. events.
 
danielsutton said:
Law enforcement agencies still need to get court warrants before they can conduct this kind of surveillance, so it is not like our constitutional rights are being violated.
Click to expand...

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Your Honor, we need to collect everyone's cell phone location and we'll throw away everyone else's, except Fred Drugdealer's. I mean, we'll keep it on a hard disk that we don't look at, until we may need it later, just in case someone else broke the law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back