

Wireless Firms Are Flooded by Requests to Aid Surveillance - wallflower
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/cell-carriers-see-uptick-in-requests-to-aid-surveillance.html?hp

======
einhverfr
The Constitutional questions here are very interesting and rapidly evolving.
For example, is requesting cell site location data like tracking a beeper in a
can of ether on a public highway or like a pen register? Or is it more like a
wiretap of a search of a building? What happens when GPS is turned on?

There isn't a lot of case law here. In general though courts have expressed
concern about the sorts of surveillance that are becoming possible. See, for
example the cell site location arguments at the 3rd circuit appeals court or
the opinions of Sotomayor and Alito in Jones v. United States last year
(Alito's opinion concurring in judgement was joined by Kagan, Breyer, and
Ginsberg. Sotomayor joined the majority of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and
Kennedy as a narrow way to resolve the case, but she also went beyond that and
endorsed Alito's logic as well, which complicates counting votes).

~~~
jakewalker
I highly recommend Orin Kerr's article, The Case For The Third Party Doctrine,
on this issue (available here:
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1138128>).

A much different constitutional analysis when the data is requested from a
cellular service provider, versus when it is gathered directly by state actors
(police).

Kerr is simply fantastic on these issues. Worth reading more of his Fourth
Amendment writing if you are interested.

~~~
einhverfr
Kerr is an important professor and author in this area. He has also been a
staunch academic opponent to further Constitutional controls, which has made
his writings on Jones v United States and the 3rd Circuit cell site location
case interesting to read. Look up things he has written about "Matrix" theory
of fourth amendment protections.

I don't think Kerr really grasps the level of unease that the courts are
developing regarding the capability of dragnet surveillance by the government
of this sort.

But definitely, anything he has written is pretty much a must-read in this
field.

Edit: Also Prof. Kerr blogs at <http://www.volokh.com> and
<http://www.scotusblog.com>

------
sanxiyn
I am actually surprised that this is the first public accounting of its kind
in US. I live in South Korea, and Korea Communications Commission publishes
these numbers broken down by request types in accordance with Electronic
Communications Privacy Act. This has been the case since 2005.

------
TheGateKeeper
My question is: why are they storing the data anyways? Pass it along and don't
keep it on the servers! Ignore all requests not authorized by a Warrant issued
by a Judge.

~~~
RKearney
Or maybe it's time for phones to adopt PGP for text messages? You could
collect your friends or colleagues public keys and then the telephone
companies haven't the slightest idea what you're texting back and forth.

If you're using iMessage or BBM, they already can't provide any of that data
to law enforcement. I'm not sure how Apple or RIM handles requests for users
data from law enforcement though.

~~~
uptown
A while back there was talk of BBM being banned in some countries (India was
one of them) because of the problem of monitoring BBM messaging.

[http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2009585,00.htm...](http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2009585,00.html)

Miraculously, they were allowed to remain in service in those countries. It's
safe to assume the nations didn't just give up on their quest to obtain access
to the messaging data.

~~~
ihsw
It wasn't miraculous, RIM capitulated and provided the keys to the kingdom.
BBM is vulnerable.

------
nodata
The danger here is that surveillance becomes something that is the norm, that
is not questioned.

~~~
mtgx
Completely agree. While the Government doing something wrong here is bad
enough, what worries me most is the change in culture for both the authorities
and the people. If the people start getting used to it, that means there could
be decades of abuses until people decide that maybe accepting it wasn't such a
good idea to begin with, and they need to reverse the trend (which could take
another couple of decades).

------
obituary_latte
Is anyone really surprised?

When you agree to use a service, you agree to the service using you--
regardless of tos. You become the commodity. There will always be concessions
that need to be made in the name of convenience. It's natural. See power,
telephony, medical and other technology for reference--should you need to.

~~~
paulsutter
The framers of the constitution would be surprised. The fourth amendment
prohibits the government from fishing around in our private affairs without
probable cause:

"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."

~~~
alttab
Agreed. A "is anyone really surprised?" attitude is not compatible with
American values. As actors in the technology industry we should do more to
protect the civil rights and privacy of our users.

Compromising these ideals in my mind is weak behavior especially when used as
part of a monetization strategy. Towing the line of your TOS should be iron-
glad, _especially_ in the face of government inquiries.

Vigilance begets liberty. Liberty must always be defended or someone will
easily take it away. Not to say that we haven't already lost a lot of ground,
but giving up and saying "thats the way it is" is simply not an option for me
as I am an American citizen.

For those internationals, give in at your own peril.

~~~
obituary_latte
"That's the way it is" is indeed unacceptable. What you have to consider,
though, is the fact that many (read most) have no concept, no idea that there
is another option.

On a very base level, when you opt-in to a service of convenience, you are
handing over your data--your information. As such, it should not be a surprise
--given the current circumstances--when that data is used against you.

I am not saying don't fight it--quite the contrary. But I question whether
fighting it on this level is more or less productive than fighting the issue
at root, whatever that is.

~~~
alttab
Technology that works to encrypt all data when it goes to the cloud and
decrypt it when it comes back would be a big step in the right direction.
Simply make it impossible to compromise your privacy without a warranty for
the private key. Makes it much easier to tell overreaching governments to
politely "go fuck themselves."

~~~
pyre
Until encryption gets classified as a munition again...

~~~
einhverfr
That boat has sailed. If that happens, we might as well just require banks to
hand credit card numbers over to Russian organized crime lords....

