Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 253 posts

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#151

Post by dawnerd »

discordance wrote: post #133
jedberg wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I've been doing this for years. Only my wife and a few trusted friends have the real cell phone. Everyone else and their mother gets the GVoice number. I also change the underlying number occasionally just to mix it up even more (although truth be told that's to get better wireless deals, but it has a nice bonus of added security).

How do you avoid giving your mobile number to service providers on sign up (banks, paypal, uber etc)?

Google voice works fine for that... I do the same. It's wonderful.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#152

Post by zorga »

dogma1138 wrote: post #147
zorga wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most other countries don't have our intractable political system; bondsman solve a problem, they let people get out of jail when the government is being absurd.

And do you think the bondsmen don’t have an incentive to keep the status quo? It’s a multi billion dollar industry which effectively taxes the poor. Make bounties illegal and it fill fall, once it falls the entire bail system in the US will have to be rethought as there isn’t a way to lock so many people up, more judges will release them until trial without setting a bail which they can already legally do and do so f…

You're putting the cart before the horse; until you change the government and thus the bail system, we need bondsman. Making bounties illegal won't stop judges from setting bails people can't afford and is thus not a valid solution.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#153

Post by davidf18 »

Notably, Verizon was found not to give out locations unlike AT&T, Sprint and T-mobile.

Disclosure: I"m a long-time Verizon customer.

These firms have no business selling customer location data. There is absolutely no respect for customer privacy which is a cultural issue within these firms.

"Microbilt’s product documentation suggests the phone location service works on all mobile networks, however the middleman was unable or unwilling to conduct a search for a Verizon device. Verizon did not respond to a request for comment."

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#155

Post by saagarjha »

zorga wrote: post #139
h0mEDw wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You guys need (something like) GDPR in the US. I believe it's a necessity.

No we don't, it's a terrible law that unnecessarily burdens business and just makes it even harder to run a business. We don't need any more legal hoops to jump through; it's not the users data, it's our data about the user. The notion that data about you belongs to you is frankly absurd, just because the EU hopped on the crazy train doesn't mean the rest of the planet should follow them.

> it's not the users data, it's our data about the user. The notion that data about you belongs to you is frankly absurd

Interestingly, I find your viewpoint to be just as absurd. Why shouldn't data about me belong to me? Why can't I tell people not to collect data about me when they are providing me with an unrelated service?

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#156

Post by me_again »

dogma1138 wrote: post #109
40acres wrote: post #56

I think we need to reassess how we treat data generated by users via phones, devices and our digital activities. We had the concept of private and public property long before intellectual property became codified by law. I believe that we are entering a new phase which may require the development of a new type of jurisprudence around things like location data. I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I'm starting to believe…

How about we start with not allowing people to legally kidnap individuals? I never understood the whole concept of “bounty hunters” in the US it’s not the Wild West anymore. The problem here is that “fugitive recovery” doesn’t need to meet any of the standards normal law enforcement does and unless they kill someone or injure bystanders there likely won’t be an investigation into their conduct and even if there is on…

The person writing the article was able to obtain data despite not even being a "real bounty hunter" (whatever that is). And it seems entirely plausible for a stalker/abusive ex/etc) to obtain the same data. So I think the collection and resale of the data remains an issue regardless of the bail bond/bounty hunter aspect.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#157

Post by jamiequint »

macintux wrote: post #89
jamiequint wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely incorrect. Google/Facebook/etc actually have far better data privacy than the telecoms. Google/Facebook/etc all sell access to target you using the data they know about you. Telecoms literally sell your data. There's a big difference.

Google I’ll buy, but Facebook does sell your data. NYT has been hitting that story pretty hard.

Facebook does not sell your data. Facebook licensed data for very specific use cases (e.g. allowing feature phone developers to create feature phone FB apps, allowing individual apps to access data with your permission) but in both of those cases (all the NYT cases about FB data privacy in-fact) they did not get paid.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#158

Post by cabaalis »

roywiggins wrote: post #101
cabaalis wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 n…

The government is supposed to need a warrant post- Carpenter : https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-supreme-court-rules-carp...

Thanks 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.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#159

Post by megablast »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #138
jmickey wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to invent new jurisprudence - if the location data can be used to identify an individual, it is personal data under the GDPR and enjoys all the rights and protections enabled by the regulation.

relevant clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOkFHTGgao8&t=68m36s on a more serious note, even if such data is not resold commercially, and even if more detailled surveillance by a real human analyst only occurs when automated red flags are raised, and the system was designed to only allow the analyst access to the detailed data if enough or the right combination of red flags are raised there is a remaining problem…

I have no idea what your story is trying to say.

Re: Mobile customer location data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters

#160

Post by [deleted] »

chii wrote: post #115
jonahhorowitz wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding: You should still be able to use services, without consenting to them selling your data, like you can under the GDPR.

Would your tune change if by not agreeing to sell your own data, the service charges you money?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN