I’m sure Sprint Nextel insisted on 8 million actual warrants. Because the lesson of the warrantless wiretapping that took place under Bush and now under Obama was that if you insisted on such warrants you’d be investigated, tried and send to jail, and if you didn’t, Congress (including Senator Barack Obama) would give you retroactive immunity.
So, as I say, I’m sure Sprint got warrants for all of this:
Sprint Nextel provided law enforcement agencies with customer location data more than 8 million times between September 2008 and October 2009, according to a company manager who disclosed the statistic at a non-public interception and wiretapping conference in October.
The manager also revealed the existence of a previously undisclosed web portal that Sprint provides law enforcement to conduct automated “pings” to track users. Through the website, authorized agents can type in a mobile phone number and obtain global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of the phone.
The revelations, uncovered by blogger and privacy activist Christopher Soghoian, have spawned questions about the number of Sprint customers who have been under surveillance, as well as the legal process agents followed to obtain such data.
Addendum: Commenter Drewvsea points out:
In fairness to Sprint, if you go and actually read the whole story at Wired, the Sprint spokesperson did give a reasonably plausible explanation for the “8,000,000″ number: it represents the number of pings sent to cell phones. It does not represent 8,000,000 individual law enforcement requests per se. Furthermore there is due process being adhered to regarding warrants, etc.– just go and actually read the full article.
Mandos
They don’t need a cell to figure out where you are. On the other hand, if—just hypothetically—I happen to be late due to traffic (excuses, excuses) for a meeting with you and a large amount of raw marinated meat, it would be impossible to inform you of my situation.
Just hypothetically. Yes…
Ian Welsh
lol. Well, the main reason is I just don’t like being easily contactable, having grown up in the age before cell phones.
Mandos
I was like that too. I got a cell phone only after I moved to the USA. Prior to that I used to hate the concept. I still 90% of the time use it to talk to Canadian family (now-defunct grandfathered GSM plan that lets me call and roam in Canada for free, otherwise, everyone but Verizon CDMA now gouges Canada calls)—but I do it use to coordinate meetings, lateness.
I was much happier when I got myself a crackberry last year on a data plan. After an hour, I could no longer remember a life without it. The downside is, I can’t use it in Canada. AND, it has a GPS. Which I use. Which I assumed the moment I started it, I would be trackable AND tracked. But so is my use of a smart card on public transit, or the anti-theft device in my car, or… or…
Celsius 233
There is an “off” switch. 😉
drewvsea
In fairness to Sprint, if you go and actually read the whole story at Wired, the Sprint spokesperson did give a reasonably plausible explanation for the “8,000,000” number: it represents the number of pings sent to cell phones. It does not represent 8,000,000 individual law enforcement requests per se. Furthermore there is due process being adhered to regarding warrants, etc.– just go and actually read the full article.
Wow, I can’t believe I actually just wrote a paragraph in defense of a telecom company– but it ticks me off whenever Aravosis plays loose and sensational with the facts, which is often, and it’s why I stopped reading him several years ago.
Ian Welsh
As I understand it “off” is not sufficient, there has to be no power.
John Ballard
I’m glad to know I’m not alone.
It could be worse than we imagine. I came across the “roving bug” notion three years ago.
http://hootsbuddy.blogspot.com/2006/12/fbis-roving-bug.html
No telling how much further along technology has come since then. At that time business people in the know removed the batteries from their phones before having sensitive conversations. By now new phones could very well have internal capacitors capable of squirreling away enough power to bypass even that defense.
(I’m not really paranoid. Just an old Luddite.)
Celsius 233
@ Ian Welsh and John Ballard;
Interesting, I had thought “off” was off; but apparently I’m mistaken. I guess I’ve become too complacent since relocating well outside of the U.S. Long ears are forever apparently. With my increasingly more radical views, maybe I need to be more diligent, no?
Lex
No, “off” doesn’t mean “off”. You can tell when a cell is communicating with the mothership if it’s near a set of speakers; the speakers pick up the signal and you’ll a hear a series of little clicks.
The upshot is that if you’re planning to be on the run you can place your cell on something moving in the opposite direction you’ll be moving. But that doesn’t help the everyday banality of the surveillance society.
It’s also another good reason to drive old cars without all the fancy computer crap.