ISP capturing Cell Phone Data!!

[MikeDVB]

Are you okay with data mining, eavesdropping, and warrantless information gathering?

If I'm broadcasting unencrypted information through the airwaves and somebody snags that - what am I going to do? I can't really claim my privacy is being invaded just like if I take a megaphone and stick it out my window and start yelling private conversations - I can't be mad at people who happen to overhear said conversations.

Sure - you may need a device to hear what is being sent - but that device in and of itself isn't an invasion of privacy IMHO. The invasion of privacy is sending private information out in a way that can easily be intercepted and listened to/watched.

Now - if there's encryption and they're breaking that encryption - that's an invasion of privacy and would require a warrant IMHO.

I don't know that it's 'tricking' the cells to connect to it because, if so, it would actually have to function as a cell tower for said service otherwise said service would never receive it and, as such, it'd 'fail' to send. It's more likely they're eavesdropping on unencrypted broadcasted communications.

All of this said - I'm not an attorney - maybe there are laws against listening in on unencrypted publicly broadcasted signals that contain private information. Maybe the signals are encrypted and that encryption is being broken - I don't know. I know there are laws regarding wiretapping but generally that requires cooperation of the phone service to let you 'hook in' or you actually have to modify the circuit/connect into it to snag it so it's a little different.

To make an analogy of sorts to make my point of view make more sense to more people... If I am using wifi without encryption and you watch my data being transmitted back and forth between my computer and my access point - what law have you broken? The one violating my privacy in this case would be me by taking no steps to ensure my private communication is private.

If I am using wifi with encryption and you crack that encryption to listen in on that data being transmitted back and forth between my computer and my access point - you're certainly violating my privacy and quite possibly some laws.

 

[Cpl. Klinger]

This one ought to bring out both the "cop haters" and the "help-help, I'm being oppressed'rs". Should see most my ignore list in this thread, how exciting!!

I don't hate cops, and I don't have quite the oppressed attitude some folks on here have. But I don't think that it's in the state's best interest to spend almost $400,000 on a device that almost certainly is going against a few parts of the state and US constitution. I never consented to the state having access to the numbers I dial on my phone. If you want to, go for it, but keep me out of it.

 

[Lebowski]

This one ought to bring out both the "cop haters" and the "help-help, I'm being oppressed'rs". Should see most my ignore list in this thread, how exciting!!

You called? I'm just going to read your mail because it's in your mailbox and I can reach it from the sidewalk. Don't worry, I'm just trying to see if you're doing anything illegal, that's all. Is that okay with you? I'm sure you've got nothing to hide, after all, it's just private mail addressed to you.


I get bank info sent to my phone, when a package ships, I get a text. I get texts about web servers I manage going down/up and other alerts regarding them. You bet your ass I'd be pissed off if you or anyone else was reading my text messages that are intended for ME. Not to mention you're using expensive devices paid for by tax payers to spy on potential criminals. It's one thing to tap a phone or track an individual because so-and-so is a suspected drug peddler, or whatever, but it's much much worse to just receive messages from who knows how many devices unrelated to what you're looking for to just see what keywords you can find and what suspects you can 'create'.

What a mess this is.

 

[Cpl. Klinger]

Now - if there's encryption and they're breaking that encryption - that's an invasion of privacy and would require a warrant IMHO.

I don't know about how text messages and the numbers dialed are handled, but I know that voice traffic over a cell network is sent encrypted. I would imagine the rest of the data stream would be scrambled.

 

[Lebowski]

I don't know about how text messages and the numbers dialed are handled, but I know that voice traffic over a cell network is sent encrypted. I would imagine the rest of the data stream would be scrambled.

I doubt this stuff is sent in plain text, it'd be pretty silly if it was. Unsure if there is a PGP encryption equivalent for text messages, but it'd be pretty neat. I guess it'd require both parties to have it enabled/installed, though.

It just saddens me when people think it's okay that you can just read someone's stuff or peer into their lives in an effort to catch someone else. I don't want people reading my mail in my mailbox outside. I don't want people reading my text messages or emails. I just don't understand the mindset that some people think it's alright to do these things. It's one thing to have a real suspect, someone you honestly believe is up to no good and with something to backup that suspicion. Keep an eye on that person, sure. But who knows how many devices have connected to one of these towers and how much data it collected from just regular folks. Creepy to think someone is sitting there potentially sifting through that data.

 

[lonehoosier]

Duped by six days.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-capturing-cell-phone-data.html?highlight=ISP

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

ECPA 1986 et seq forbids listening to the old analog cell phones, cordless phones, even baby monitors. I'm pretty sure it has been extended to the digital/CDMA phones, in addition to which, the machine necessary to separate out one call from the group isn't trivial. The technology is, however, available to law enforcement, though the "wide net" probably abuses the spirit of that law.

 

[mrjarrell]

Duped by six days.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-capturing-cell-phone-data.html?highlight=ISP

And it's politics in the Break Room. A No-No.

 

[MikeDVB]

Violations of the 4th amendment = politics?

 

[mrjarrell]

Violations of the 4th amendment = politics?

How is it not political? They're a government subdivision.

 

[MikeDVB]

How is it not political? They're a government subdivision.

Politics (from Greek: politikos, meaning "of, for, or relating to citizens") is the practice and theory of influencing other people on a civic or individual level. More narrowly, it refers to achieving and exercising positions of governance — organized control over a human community, particularly a state.

I don't see how violations of an amendment to the constitution has anything to do with influencing others on a civic or individual level... Is there an alternate meaning to the word 'political' that I'm not aware of?

None of this is sarcasm - I genuinely want to know.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

If I'm broadcasting unencrypted information through the airwaves and somebody snags that - what am I going to do? I can't really claim my privacy is being invaded .

Why not ? This isn't the old days of an actual operator and party line where everyone hears your conversation .

What's the point of have individual phone numbers if I can't speak to that person without having everybody know what I'm talking about ?

Is this legal for non legal types to do ? I bet it isn't .

 

[mrjarrell]

I don't see how violations of an amendment to the constitution has anything to do with influencing others on a civic or individual level... Is there an alternate meaning to the word 'political' that I'm not aware of?

None of this is sarcasm - I genuinely want to know.

There are specific fora for specific subjects. Subjects pertaining to things like this and government entities would, logically, go in the Politics Forum. Not the Break Room. If you can't see that this subject is political in nature that's your fault, not mine or anyone else's.

[h=2]Break Room[/h](37 Viewing)
General off-topic NON-FIREARMS related discussion goes here! PS: No Politics!

 

[MikeDVB]

Why not ? This isn't the old days of an actual operator and party line where everyone hears your conversation .

In much the same way that if I'm yelling across the street to my neighbor about something private and somebody else overhears it... I can't be angry at them because I was the one broadcasting it publicly for any and all to hear.

Sure - you may need special equipment to listen to the cellular broadcast but if it's unencrypted I cannot expect it to be private.

To make a parallel analogy - IM clients by and large send plain-text messages. I have no expectation of privacy when using said clients in my mind because I know it's extremely easy to watch those messages. If I'm using encryption then I do have an expectation of privacy. This is just my opinion though - I'm not speaking to the constitution or the law.

What's the point of have individual phone numbers if I can't speak to that person without having everybody know what I'm talking about ?

Do you believe a standard phone call [cellular or land-line] is secure? The answer is: no, it's not.

Is this legal for non legal types to do ? I bet it isn't .

If you broadcast a signal and I receive that signal and I can interpret that signal without having to circumvent some sort of protection, like encryption, have I violated the law by receiving that signal?

 

[Mosinguy]

My school used a similar system very recently and looked at my texts. That's the reason why I've been suspended until January. They are always watching. Everyone is.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

There are specific fora for specific subjects. Subjects pertaining to things like this and government entities would, logically, go in the Politics Forum. Not the Break Room. If you can't see that this subject is political in nature that's your fault, not mine or anyone else's.

Though I do more often than I let on in my posts, it may sound odd now, when I say I agree with mrjarrell.

 

[mbills2223]

My school used a similar system very recently and looked at my texts. That's the reason why I've been suspended until January. They are always watching. Everyone is.

Are you kidding me? This actually happened?

 

[MikeDVB]

My school used a similar system very recently and looked at my texts. That's the reason why I've been suspended until January. They are always watching. Everyone is.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume the school has a policy against students using cellular devices while on campus?

Curious as to what that policy actually says if it exists.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

In much the same way that if I'm yelling across the street to my neighbor about something private and somebody else overhears it... I can't be angry at them because I was the one broadcasting it publicly for any and all to hear.

Sure - you may need special equipment to listen to the cellular broadcast but if it's unencrypted I cannot expect it to be private.

To make a parallel analogy - IM clients by and large send plain-text messages. I have no expectation of privacy when using said clients in my mind because I know it's extremely easy to watch those messages. If I'm using encryption then I do have an expectation of privacy. This is just my opinion though - I'm not speaking to the constitution or the law.

Do you believe a standard phone call [cellular or land-line] is secure? The answer is: no, it's not.

If you broadcast a signal and I receive that signal and I can interpret that signal without having to circumvent some sort of protection, like encryption, have I violated the law by receiving that signal?

Makes me wanna be a hermit in a hidden cave even more .

 

[Caleb]

I don't know that it's 'tricking' the cells to connect to it because, if so, it would actually have to function as a cell tower for said service otherwise said service would never receive it and, as such, it'd 'fail' to send. It's more likely they're eavesdropping on unencrypted broadcasted communications.

Then pass the data through a computer