WSJ: US secret DOJ spy program using planes/fake towers to get cell phone data

[Gumboy]

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ameri...&mg=reno64-wsj

So basically, the DOJ is flying around in planes that mimic cell phone towers in order to get data from all cell users in range of the fake mimic'ed cell phone towers, even if the phones are OFF.

For those who can't get behind the pay wall of WSJ:

http://gizmodo.com/secret-u-s-spy-pr...nes-1658573067

"There are some serious and troubling legal questions about this program," EFF Staff Attorney Hanni Fakhoury told me. "It's important to note this is very different from the government getting this information from a phone company. In the last few months, many state courts and legislatures have required law enforcement get a probable cause search warrant to use these devices. The US Marshals should explain how this program works and what kind of court authorization, if any, they're obtaining to fly planes with 'dirtboxes.'""

This is huge news. Judges are authorizing these searches based on individual people, NOT to get all the data from anyone in the area.

"The fake phone tower signals used work even on phones with encryption, like the iPhone 6, so there's virtually no way phone makers could've prevented this from happening."

So even if you have encryption on, they are still getting your shit.

Dragnet surveillance is absolutely insane. This should not be legal, period. As the article says, this is as bad as anything the NSA has been doing.

[lockedout]

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ameri...&mg=reno64-wsj

So basically, the DOJ is flying around in planes that mimic cell phone towers in order to get data from all cell users in range of the fake mimic'ed cell phone towers, even if the phones are OFF.

That doesn't sound expensive at all.

[Garnier Fructis]

All this surveillance and we still don't have enough security to prevent crazies from running into the White House.

[Naxere]

Don't worry, if you're not doing anything wrong what do you have to hide?

[taliey]

Don't worry, if you're not doing anything wrong what do you have to hide?

Presumptuous much?

[Independent voter]

You can do the same thing. It's called a cell phone repeater. Say you live on a ranch out in the middle of nowhere with no cell reception. You set up a repeater and it relays the signal across the distance.

The thing about these repeaters is that any cell phone within range can use them and they aren't secure, You can listen in on calls. Now if you were a bad person you could set up one of these repeaters in a city and intercept all kinds of cellphone traffic.

[lockedout]

You can do the same thing.

If you don't mind going to prison.

[apepi]

I thought some airport did this before?

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Presumptuous much?

He's not wrong in that regard.

[Gumboy]

He's not wrong in that regard.

Yeah, because I don't have anything to hide I should be fine with the DOJ spying on my phone...ok then.

- - - Updated - - -

That doesn't sound expensive at all.

They are flying around in cessna's with it, not like big jumbo jets I guess. Not sure on the expense. Just crazy that they feel this is acceptable.

BTW:

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/...us_aircra.html

Strange story from last year might be explained now.

[jugzilla]

We can do this, but we don't have the technology to build a fence along the southern border. #priorities

[Daymanmb]

We can do this, but we don't have the technology to build a fence along the southern border. #priorities

For what? To keep the Mexicans from going back home?

[Rukentuts]

I don't see why people are seeing the signals you choose to send out is surprising.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

I don't see why people are seeing the signals you choose to send out is surprising.

This is such a horse shit argument. You're emitting light, why aren't you surprised if people see you naked in your own home!?

The intent is what matters. If something is intended to be private, that should be respected.

[Elegiac]

This is such a horse shit argument. You're emitting light, why aren't you surprised if people see you naked in your own home!?

Why the fuck do you not own curtains?

The intent is what matters. If something is intended to be private, that should be respected.

No, intent is -not- what matters. What matters is reasonable expectation.

[Rukentuts]

This is such a horse shit argument. You're emitting light, why aren't you surprised if people see you naked in your own home!?

The intent is what matters. If something is intended to be private, that should be respected.

So get an encrypted link. In this tenuous comparison that's analogous to drawing the shades.

[Gumboy]

So get an encrypted link. In this tenuous comparison that's analogous to drawing the shades.

It says right in the article, and the OP has a quote, that the encrypted system on your phone does nothing to this.

If this was a republican president certain posters in here would be freaking the fuck out. But he is on "Their side" so its all good, right?

How do you feel about the "PATRIOT" act? Illegal wiretappings? This is the same exact thing. They get a warrant (Which is not even required in most states, yet) to get ONE persons data...but collect it all in the area.

[Reg]

I'm just going to start Googleing "How to make a bomb" daily and wait for the cavalry to arrive.

[Rukentuts]

It says right in the article, and the OP has a quote, that the encrypted system on your phone does nothing to this.

If this was a republican president certain posters in here would be freaking the fuck out. But he is on "Their side" so its all good, right?

How do you feel about the "PATRIOT" act? Illegal wiretappings? This is the same exact thing. They get a warrant (Which is not even required in most states, yet) to get ONE persons data...but collect it all in the area.

There's many sorts of encryption systems. Some are shitty. Personally I wouldn't hold Apple on some pedestal when it comes to software; especially security.

[Deleted]

Breaking news

America spies on its own citizens...

Surely you just expect this kind of shit per normal?