Wireless Firms Are Flooded By Requests To Aid Surveillance

(ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — In the first public accounting of its kind, cellphone carriers reported that they responded to a startling 1.3 million demands for subscriber information last year from law enforcement agencies seeking text messages, caller locations and other information in the course of investigations.

Read the whole story at The New York Times

From our partners

Comments

[Mark Slugocki]

12:45 PM on 07/10/2012

Just buy yourself a burner cell under a false name an when your minutes are low just buy another card available anywhere to ad minutes.

[vidian6]

04:10 PM on 07/09/2012

As I said when the Bush administration moved to expand these eavesdropping guidelines, that it wasn't about terrorist as they had claimed. Instead it was about spying on American citizens and using terrorist as a convenient excuse

[Genders]

03:33 PM on 07/09/2012

Assume your cell phone is tapped. Internet from your cell phone as well.

Notebook and desktop computers can at least be reliably disconnected from the network if you really want some security and the anti malware software for windows, apple and ubuntu are all better than smart phones.

[KarmaPatrol]

01:51 PM on 07/09/2012

There's an "ON/OFF" switch, "Power" switch, or even the airport mode, y'know. Live your life untethered by the phone, turning it on when watching the Bourne trilogy for the 17th time on cable ... while munching Cheetos.

[Ilovestuff]

12:03 PM on 07/09/2012

Because Obama wants to know.....

[belladio]

12:06 PM on 07/09/2012

Lame, incredibly lame. Sure, it's all Obama.

You, ilovestuff, are part of the problem by narrowly focusing on the pretty balloon overhead rather than the big looming missile headed your way.

[vidian6]

04:14 PM on 07/09/2012

Don't you mean that bust wanted to know, it was him who instituted these eavesdropping guidelines.

[Patroclus]

12:00 PM on 07/09/2012

Americans are living in a virtual (yes, multiple implications) police state. Given the Patriot Act and FISA it can easily be converted into a real police state over night. The present occupant of the White House, who pushed for even more restrictive police state measures, may forbear in using those police powers that essentially remove all legal protections of the citizen from imprisonment from the state, but there is little assurance future presidents may not invoke such powers. The appalling authoritarian and intolerant American right wing's candidates all would not hesitate to use such powers for political gain. Look at how they have subverted the vote. Further, we have a court system, especially the SCOTUS, that is increasingly obedient to and solicitous of the political authority. America is an incipient police state and, I suspect, in not too many years will be an actual one - perhaps as soon as next January.

[belladio]

11:01 AM on 07/09/2012

It seems pretty clear to me that we essentially have zero privacy anymore. Agencies have vehicles and aircraft that can track our movements even in our own homes, for crying out loud. Nothing we do online is truly private unless one goes to great lengths to ensure it, something most of us probably don't do. And phone calls, emails, texts, IMs, our posts on threads such as this, bank information, shopping habits - all of those bits are free for the taking now.

Am I just paranoid, am I just stoned? Neither, at least not the latter. No. I'm realistic and aware that the surveillance state has not only crossed the line but dances on it while laughing at us. And no, I'm not doing anything "wrong" to warrant "paranoia." The only thing I may be guilty of, depending on perspective, if that I do NOT fall for the propaganda and lies any longer and tossed out the rose colored glasses we're all expected to wear.

To those who see no problem in handing over personal information and discourse to any and all agencies because they believe they have nothing to fear, I say you haven't a clue about what the words freedom and privacy truly mean. You will happily lead us into an authoritarian police state on a cloud of your own arrogance and ignorance.

[UnrepentantRadical]

11:10 AM on 07/09/2012

If you weren't doing something wrong, you wouldn't be worried about privacy. ;)

Like usual, a beautifully written post filled with truth. Any wonder I adore you so? :-*
BTW, I'm off to do ashiiiiiiitjob for SharonJean. Call me if you need anything.

[Hidare]

11:15 AM on 07/09/2012

So erosion of your civil liberties should be based on not doing wrong?

[UnRed]

10:56 AM on 07/09/2012

Swim says take out your phone battery if you're doing something you shouldn't and, even if you aren't, it's probably good advice anyway.

[Roadrun]

10:46 AM on 07/09/2012

"The need for the police to exploit that technology “has grown tremendously, and it’s absolutely vital,” he said in an interview.

And dollars to donuts says the abuse (Hey AT&T, where's that cheating wife of mine? Where are my derelict kids about now? I'll teach you to cut off an off duty police officer!) has grown so far above any legitimate need that the invasion of privacy crime exceeds the crime they say they are stopping.

[Cognitive Dissident]

10:36 AM on 07/09/2012

You vill submit HAPPILY! Ve haff vays off mekking you!

[Cognitive Dissident]

10:24 AM on 07/09/2012

This is exactly what Congress intended when it mandated a few years ago that ALL US cell phones must have a GPS receiver in them.

There's nothing like having the little people think they're free while they're reporting their positions constantly.

And, BTW, Congress mandated that you and I PAY for the receivers. Yep, another individual mandate (I'm FOR the ACA one, but not this one).

The only way not to be tracked is to remove your battery.

[Salfana]

10:44 AM on 07/09/2012

How typically stupid of us. Not only are we spied on but we pay for it.

[vidian6]

04:18 PM on 07/09/2012

No doubt, ain't that a b_tch!

[XLII]

10:17 AM on 07/09/2012

George Orwell told us in "1984" about a time we all would be under constant surveillance by the government. What he didn't tell us was the we'd all eagerly rush out to buy the tools of this surveillance and pay monthly fees to enable this invasion of privacy.

[Ilovestuff]

12:04 PM on 07/09/2012

Yep, we have one party rule under two different names. Dems and Republicans are the exact same thing. People need to wake up to that fact.

[Depleroma]

10:14 AM on 07/09/2012

"For instance, when a police agency asks for a cell tower “dump” for data on subscribers who were near a tower during a certain period of time, it may get back hundreds or even thousands of names."

I found that sentence alarming. That sort of "dump" shouldn't be allowed. If enforcement wants to track an individual, the cell carrier should list the towers the individual has used, rather than turning everybody's data over.

Why are they turning over the entire haystack when they could just as easily turn over the needle?

[J0E1]

10:08 AM on 07/09/2012

1.3 million... in a year... Can anyone honestly say that these were all legitimate requests that included court issued warrants and keep a straight face?

[vidian6]

04:21 PM on 07/09/2012

Of course not, but my problem is how the people who are charged with protecting the rights of citizens seem to be confused, as to validity of these requests.

[Midnight Son]

10:07 AM on 07/09/2012

Again, for all of you who aren't aware of it and aren't using it:

http://www.torproject.org

[Cognitive Dissident]

10:25 AM on 07/09/2012

Good stuff, but does it work with phones?

[Midnight Son]

11:00 AM on 07/09/2012

Yes.

https://guardianproject.info/apps/orbot/