61–70 of 256 posts
I find it concerning that a judge, being presented with a textual description of four GPS coordinates would sign off on a warrant without simply asking... "okay, can you show me that on a map then?"
Do we know that the judge didn't simply plug the coordinates into some online mapping service to find out? It's not that hard...
I find it concerning that a judge, being presented with a textual description of four GPS coordinates would sign off on a warrant without simply asking... "okay, can you show me that on a map then?"
In the criminal justice system a judge is asked, in 15 minutes average per case, to see if there is any reason at all to suspect this person, nothing more. A judge would sign off given just the list of coordinates, and legally, they'd be correct in doing so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple doesn't track you by default (or when it does, it sends the data anonymously). The Apps on ios might track you, and that's why I will not use Google maps again. Your provider indeed tracks you, but at least for now, the accuracy is way below GPS. It is an issue and we should all be worried about slippery slope that it puts us all on.
>it sends the data anonymously It shouldn't send anything at all if Apple was privacy minded. A warrant for all anonymous data from that location combined with a provider data from that cell and the user isn't anonymous anymore.
You can turn location services off at the device-level, which stops everything from collecting your location data.
You can disallow apps, individually, from having access to your location data, as well; but that requires granual settings that most people aren't aware of and/or can't be arsed to go check every time that they install an app.
If I recall, correctly, apps using the Facebook SDK will still retrieve and push the last known location (yay for pointers...) but that's a problem with the app (and Facebook) moreso than it is with Apple.
So, this was just a long-winded and pointless way to say, you can prevent the data from being sent but, agreed, Apple could do slightly better in this area; however, I think it's a trade-off betwixt absolutely strict-privacy (e.g.: explicit deny until approved) and usability for them.
How often does someone carrying out a planned crime carry a phone with them that is switched on, these days? Use of mobile phone data by the police has been standard practice since 2001, at least, and widely publicised.
I think at some point people will go to jail because they turned off and on their phone before and after a horrible murder that happened nearby.
>[2] Matching entry / exit point – we know specifically they look for that, so don’t match the last use and first use of phones, overlap it.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1q4Ir2J8P8
[2] http://privacy-pc.com/articles/dont-fuck-it-up-6-opsec-with-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well yeah, you can be followed by a guy in a trenchcoat too, no matter what your phone's privacy settings are.
The difference between cell tower triangulation, and Google/Apple services tracking your location is small. The difference between cell tower triangulation, and being followed by a guy in a trenchcoat is not. In fact, there's a number of categorical differences between the first two, and the third. 1. The first two are automated. 2. The first two are recorded in a computer-searchable database. 3. The first two, by na…
I find it concerning that a judge, being presented with a textual description of four GPS coordinates would sign off on a warrant without simply asking... "okay, can you show me that on a map then?"
> He noted that even if it did target the wrong person, "it doesn't mean they're going to get convicted or arrested, it just gives the detective a look at who could be involved." ...because no case has ever been so righteously pursued, with such a vigorous degree of righteous indignation, that an innocent person was ever thrown in prison[0], yeah? This blasé attitude about sweeping-up data of innocent people is preci…
"Hmm, this black person was near..."
So would this work the other way around? Leave your phone at home to prove you didn't go somewhere?
No, because people leave their phone at home all the time, but phones rarely go on trips without the owner.
How often does someone carrying out a planned crime carry a phone with them that is switched on, these days? Use of mobile phone data by the police has been standard practice since 2001, at least, and widely publicised.
Almost all of the time.
Several years ago while living in London we had a visit from the police because they were able to access my partner’s Oyster travel card registration details — she had provided her home address and I hadn’t. They were following up on an apparently minor assault and pulled tbe Oyster card details for everyone on a specific train. Considering this is a city with ubiquitous CCTV, smart phones are just another data sourc…
Is there still any advantage to having a registered oyster card?