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

[Gumboy]

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.

So, to stop blanket surveillance from our government, which has no right to do so, we should get programs to encrypt it? Weren't people just complaining in the "Civil forfetiure" thread about having to do things in order to protect your legal rights from the police? How is this any different? Because its higher up then just a cop on the street?

Please, explain.

[Shurkuris]

Well the Jews didn't do anything wrong in Germany. So it's all right if Government workers come in to inspect your personal things.


As Stalin rightly said... "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime"

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

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

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.

Do you not realize how ridiculous you are being? Oh, get it encrypted. It is? Oh, well get better encryption, people shouldn't respect your privacy, you have to lock yourself in lead-lined sound-proof room for privacy!

[Rukentuts]

Do you not realize how ridiculous you are being? Oh, get it encrypted. It is? Oh, well get better encryption, people shouldn't respect your privacy, you have to lock yourself in lead-lined sound-proof room for privacy!

Transmitting unsecured data in every direction has no reasonable expectation of privacy. The courts tend to agree. It is the legal equivalent to having a conversation in a public domain. Because that's exactly what the air between your phone and the cell tower is.

[Gumboy]

Transmitting unsecured data in every direction has no reasonable expectation of privacy. The courts tend to agree.

Except it does not matter if the data is "Secure" in this, as it tricks the phone into thinking it is just another cell phone tower..did you even read either article linked?

- - - Updated - - -

Like..they are having problems with random peoples phones thinking they are real towers, leading to dropped calls. Interfering with 911 is a legit concern because phones don't know the difference in these fake and real towers...

[Rukentuts]

Except it does not matter if the data is "Secure" in this, as it tricks the phone into thinking it is just another cell phone tower..did you even read either article linked?

- - - Updated - - -

Like..they are having problems with random peoples phones thinking they are real towers, leading to dropped calls. Interfering with 911 is a legit concern because phones don't know the difference in these fake and real towers...

Probably because Apple devs are morons that fail security 101 (fappening anyone?) and probably just transmit over the key for everyone to see.

[Kellhound]

The interception of any radiation on the electromagnetic spectrum that requires the use of any technology to achieve should require a search warrant. The automated collection of any data should require a search warrant. The loss of privacy should NOT be accepted by the masses.

[Christan]

Transmitting unsecured data in every direction has no reasonable expectation of privacy. The courts tend to agree. It is the legal equivalent to having a conversation in a public domain. Because that's exactly what the air between your phone and the cell tower is.

While true for things like CB radios GSM is a mobile encryption standard thats used by more than 3/4ths of cell phones world wide if i remember right.
You can legally listen in on encrypted static sure, but decrypting them is whats against the law(unless you are the law then you are above it...sadly)
Sadly its easily hacked(decrypted) but hey

Edit
Ehh gsm was the start of all of it not encryption specific lol...

[PACOX]

So if they are actually spying on all these people then how come they still have a hard time finding fugitives and taking down crime rings?

[Zvinny]

So if they are actually spying on all these people then how come they still have a hard time finding fugitives and taking down crime rings?

Because some fugitives are intelligent enough to take steps to mitigate this, and any moderately intelligent crime rings actively take steps to mitigate this.

If you're really paranoid about this, look up Wickr.

[PaladinBash]

So...don't be a criminal then? Don't plot terrorism? I mean really you whingers and traitors all bitch and moan that you're oppressed til the cows come home but when the government does anything REMOTELY 'oppressive' (such as watching to see if you talk about breaking the law, the horror, right)...you absolutely lose your minds. Either you're not actually oppressed and you're just criminals that are looking to hide behind the very laws you break or you are sooks that look for something to be a victim of. Either way I'm glad they're doing it and hope it has results. If anything, the only criticism I have of such methods is that they don't have the results you'd expect.

[Gumboy]

We are whiners and traitors for not wanting the government to spy on innocent people. Ok then.

- - - Updated - - -

You clearly have no idea what "rights" are, I suggest maybe reading up on it or something.

Not everyone that would rather not be spied on is a terrorist, we have these crazy things called "rights" in this country.

[Spectral]

This is yet another example of why I have contempt for everyone working in intelligence these days. The network they've constructed is absurdly expensive, shows little or nothing in the way of positive outcomes, and is turnkey operation for any potentially unpleasant future governance.

[Deleted]

I dont know... that method seems very 1990's

[oxymoronic]

Presumptuous much?

is it true though?

- - - Updated - - -

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

tried it - doesnt work

- - - Updated - - -

I dont know... that method seems very 1990's

explain yourself boy

[ringpriest]

So, to stop blanket surveillance from our government, which has no right to do so, we should get programs to encrypt it? Weren't people just complaining in the "Civil forfetiure" thread about having to do things in order to protect your legal rights from the police? How is this any different? Because its higher up then just a cop on the street?

Please, explain.

I recently had a conversation about how law and liberty in the US is increasingly coming to resemble "magic". If you want to get the protection of the your legal rights, you need to know the right magic incantations, or the police don't have to actually acknowledge them. If you want private communications, you'd better have the right spell on your phone, or the government can just listen in.

- - - Updated - - -

This is yet another example of why I have contempt for everyone working in intelligence these days. The network they've constructed is absurdly expensive, shows little or nothing in the way of positive outcomes, and is turnkey operation for any potentially unpleasant future governance.

You're speaking as though those are unintended outcomes; it's becoming increasingly clear that they aren't - they're the point.

[echoSAW]

All of this is the result of advancements in communication technologies...the more convenient they become by using electronic signals, the easier they will be to intercept. Until the general population is ready to give up this convenience (it won't ), this type of reality will exist. Oh...and I would quite confidently guess that this type of thing happens in EVERY government around the world, with varying degrees of effectiveness of course.

[oxymoronic]

We are whiners and traitors for not wanting the government to spy on innocent people. Ok then.

- - - Updated - - -

You clearly have no idea what "rights" are, I suggest maybe reading up on it or something.

Not everyone that would rather not be spied on is a terrorist, we have these crazy things called "rights" in this country.

can you give a logical reason rather than an emotional one

aka why? not just cause you feel like it

- - - Updated - - -

You're speaking as though those are unintended outcomes; it's becoming increasingly clear that they aren't - they're the point.

meh even if there are no positive outcomes as you claim they learn a lot from all this that can be applied to future scenarios. so, good for them i say. carry on

[DEATHETERNAL]

Transmitting unsecured data in every direction has no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Rukentuts and I don't often agree on anything, but this is exactly right in all honesty. To say that what is willfully publically disseminated should require a warrant to access is the equivalent of me writing on the front wall of my home and then insisting that no one should look at it or read it despite the fact that I willfully and publically displayed it for viewing by anyone who wished to do so. It doesn't make any sense. Beyond that, there is no constitutional protection for such. Signals are neither person nor papers, and simply receiving signals that someone else is broadcasting of their own free will cannot be said to be a search or seizure.

[Felya]

Why can't they just demand the information from providers, as they did around the time of Patriot Act passing?