5 ms·
Cell phones are basically locator beacons for the police. The cartels know this. It's not worth discussing the specifics in the open, but the investigative tec
by mike_d 4y ago
Cell phones are basically locator beacons for the police. The cartels know this.
It's not worth discussing the specifics in the open, but the investigative techniques have gotten good enough that even "anonymous" SIM cards don't buy you anything.
- Manuel_D 4y agoA radio is inherently a locator beacon. Radio direction finding has been a cornerstone of signals intelligence for over a century. A cell phone sending encrypted messages over Signal or WhatsApp is way less suspicious than a radio mysteriously appearing on a hill. Just get a patsy to buy a normal sim card - not an "anonymous sim card" - I'm sure cartels are easily able to do this.
- mike_d 4y agoSure but one is inherently more difficult (radio direction finding) than the other (having your phone constantly beacon to a dense network of towers). What I was alluding to is when you have full access to the cellular network, there are other indicators that can be used to task tracking other than just the SIM card. You don't need to know that phone X is person Y, you just need to know that phone X fits the criteria of how a drug mule operates.
- Manuel_D 4y ago> you just need to know that phone X fits the criteria of how a drug mule operates. And my point is that this is way, way harder than looking out the window and noticing a radio tower perched on a hilltop that wasn't there before. It's far more clandestine to obtain security through obscurity even if it means operating in a network controlled by the authorities. Encrypted traffic looks like any other encrypted traffic. There's little to make a drug dealer stand out from other cell phone traffic, unless they're communicating over cleartext.
- mike_d 4y ago> And my point is that this is way, way harder That is the point I am trying to get to without giving away specifics. The reason you see homegrown communications networks in Mexico is because it is trivial for the DEA to identify members of smuggling operations by way of cell phone TTPs. DEA obtains both explicit and unauthorized access to cellular networks in foreign countries. At that point it is a pretty trivial pattern matching problem which allows you to identify persons of interest and track them going forward. They do use large scale "direction finding" to identify radios used by smuggling operations, but that is primarily targeted at boats with higher power transmitters.
- Manuel_D 4y agoAs I stated earlier, it does make sense to deploy shadow comms infrastructure along the southern border (and northern border of Mexico). Detecting a bunch of cell phone traffic in a completely remote area nowhere near any official border crossings is indeed hugely suspicious. And the cartels do set up their own infrastructure there. What doesn't make sense is deploying infra in the vicinity of major cities. There's plenty of benign cell phone traffic there, and this kind of pattern matching is not viable.
- orril 4y agoSource?
- jasonwatkinspdx 4y agoYou do not have any secret knowledge dangerous to share on this issue, I guarantee that, so drop the pretense and just say what you think clearly.