3 ms·
> More specifically, the screenshot showed a location in a particular neighborhood—just a couple of blocks from where the target was. What gets me is that the
by cabaalis 8y ago
> More specifically, the screenshot showed a location in a particular neighborhood—just a couple of blocks from where the target was.
What gets me is that the writing on wall appears to be that this data did not come from an app on the phone but from the phone company themselves, data collection that is required by the government.
"A couple of blocks from where the target was" implies to me that it was locating the nearest tower. Lat/Long coordinates of the phone within 300 meters is required by the FCC to be received by the telephone companies for Phase II of Enhanced 911. They might be snapping the lat/long to the tower, and then calling that de-identified enough to sell.
If a bounty hunter can get your snapped lat/long on demand because of E911 requirements, you better believe a TLA can as well--and probably unsnapped.
- roywiggins 8y agoThe government is supposed to need a warrant post-Carpenter: https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-supreme-court-rules-carpenter-v-united-states https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-supreme-court-rules-carp...
- cabaalis 8y agoThanks for that. The point I'm trying to make is that they create the framework for this stuff in seemingly obvious and necessary laws and regulations. Then, when it's needed, "Well look-a here! Good thing we forced that other unrelated thing. That's a nice personal locator you've got there." Meaning: Thanks to e911, a seemingly perfectly acceptable requirement, we now carry around devices that can be used to locate us. Warrant or not. Because "Let's require everyone to carry around a transponder" doesn't work whereas "We are just trying to protect you!" does.
- roywiggins 8y agoPhone companies were able to triangulate phones before e911, right? e911 just makes it mandatory to have the triangulation hardware/software actually deployed and linked up with 911 call centers, but (GPS aside) I would have thought telcos could have done that on their own with or without e911.
- walshemj 8y agoSo an offence against the espionage act then - it would probably be one under the official secrets act in the UK (unless your a tabloid journalist)