Live data from Hacker News

Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

oig.justice.gov

61–70 of 99 posts

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#61
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Want mathematical assurance that your government won't abuse power against you? Either you have to be the government or you don't live in a society with a government. Abuse isn't so easily constrained. Try proactive regulations, vigilance, and strict punishments (not comprehensive). Best effort, but what else can you do?

"Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy. You can make it cost more so it happens less. Encryption is the common example. As far as anybody knows the government can't break e.g. AES. But they can still find out what's on your device because with a warrant they can install surveillance devices in your house to capture it when you enter your passphrase, then sei…

> "Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy.

I didn't make it a dichotomy. I was just commenting that "mathematically impossible" is too strong to the point of absurdity. Not fun at parties, but I would hope it's fine on Hacker News. I then provided a rough overview of a system to mitigate abuse. We're not even disagreeing about trying to minimize government abuse.

To discuss your example of encryption, the abuse is the government installing and using the surveillance devices (let's assume the suspicion isn't beyond reasonable doubt or whatever and the warrant is invalid). The question is whether that abuse is prevented or routed and justice is enacted.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A major function of government is to prevent abuses of power. But they can still do this. If you want to know where someone is, instead of compelling devices or carriers to spy on everyone at all times, you attach a tracker to the suspect's vehicle, or assign an agent to follow them. That's more expensive -- which is the deterrent to abuse. A bad cop doesn't have time to follow around their ex all day. They do have…

The carrier is not spying on you here. A cell phone network has to know your phone's location in order to function at all, and this info has only gotten more and more fine-grained with newer network standards. There's nothing wrong with granting access to such data with proper authorization. The "expense" involved in getting warrants approved is a better check on abuse, since it's very easy to do this as part of offi…

It would be simple to design a cellular data network that didn't tie account holders to devices. Issue access tokens good for e.g. 10 GB of data to the mobile device. Don't store the token in connection with the account. Anyone could buy a prepaid card with tokens for cash at any convenience store. The network identifies the device via the token, which is temporary and anonymous. Telephone routing is done via VoIP which anyone has the option of routing through a VPN.

It's designed the way it is now on purpose, to spy on everyone.

> The "expense" involved in getting warrants approved is a better check on abuse

Except that they don't actually get warrants when they're doing abuse, they just lie about it because the phone company has minimal incentive to check and the victim who does typically isn't notified.

> Of course if your local judge will rubber-stamp blank_document.docx as a proper "warrant" you have a problem again. But that can be addressed in turn.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" is in latin because it was published circa 100 AD. No effective solution to this problem has yet been uncovered.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#63

It sounds like this was a piece of software where you uploaded a PDF of “proof” that you had the authority to track anyone in America, and then it let you. And someone finally bothered to look at the proof and it was a blank page. This is why I’m against giving the government the power to intercept communications or middle-man encryption. They always pitch it like “This power will be protected by courts and warrants…

Yea I sometimes get a feeling that a large portion of the population just doesn’t understand conditionals. If you tell them “you have the authority to do X if Y”, they just ignore the Y part.

Because the government and pretty much all those power ignore Y, and whenever they get caught, vast majority of cases they don't get punished. Of course anyone remotely intelligent would ignore the Y part too. Only extremely gullible people with their blind trust in government would look at Y part and nod along. This particular case very much the exception.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things that would help this if anytime any of these surveillance powers get used, they have to be used as part of a specific ongoing investigation, and when that investigation is closed, everything related to it becomes a matter of public record. And then you have some hard rules like, investigations are automatically closed after the statute of limitations runs, or if the target of the investigation dies,…

This is unworkable, sadly. I don't want my past location data to become a "matter of public record" merely because I have been caught up as a bystander in some random law enforcement investigation and it all ends up in the case file.

Obviously personally identifying information could be redacted without doing so for the request itself.

But you're just reiterating the problem that third parties are collecting the location data of innocent bystanders. Otherwise it wouldn't exist to be in the file.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#65
post #18

It sounds like this was a piece of software where you uploaded a PDF of “proof” that you had the authority to track anyone in America, and then it let you. And someone finally bothered to look at the proof and it was a blank page. This is why I’m against giving the government the power to intercept communications or middle-man encryption. They always pitch it like “This power will be protected by courts and warrants…

> and someone finally bothered to look at the proof and it was a blank page. I think I agree more than not with your worldview, but it seems like in this case this was the first time the person tried to improperly use the system... and he was caught and is now being sentenced. So I would say this is an example of the system "working". I'm sure there are civil rights abuses that happen much more frequently, which we d…

Is this some kind of parody? He got caught because it was a literal blank piece of paper. Anyone with any sense would write some bullshit paragraph and I'm sure plenty did and got away with it.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#66
post #23

It's disturbing how much this information is sold and resold: * Securus purchased the location data from 3Cinteractive Corporation, which was located in Boca Raton, Florida. * 3Cinteractive Corporation, in turn, purchased such data from Technocom Corporation (doing business as LocationSmart), which was located in Carlsbad, California. * Technocom Corporation (doing business as LocationSmart) purchased this data direc…

The cellphone companies have been selling the realtime location of all subscribers since at least 2018. It doesn't depend on whether you have location enabled either, since it figures out your location from the towers! On top of that, one of them had an unauthenticated API, meaning anyone in the world could track the realtime location of any US phone #[0]. If all of this bothers you, contact your state legislators. M…

> If all of this bothers you, contact your state legislators.

Hoping this is a joke because in no world will that have any effect at all.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#67
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy. You can make it cost more so it happens less. Encryption is the common example. As far as anybody knows the government can't break e.g. AES. But they can still find out what's on your device because with a warrant they can install surveillance devices in your house to capture it when you enter your passphrase, then sei…

> "Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy. I didn't make it a dichotomy. I was just commenting that "mathematically impossible" is too strong to the point of absurdity. Not fun at parties, but I would hope it's fine on Hacker News. I then provided a rough overview of a system to mitigate abuse. We're not even disagreeing about trying to minimize government ab…

The standard for a warrant is probable cause, a far lower bar than beyond reasonable doubt.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#68
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you use a constitution strong enough to prevent the government from having authority to ban a tool like that. The solution's been known and described for 250+ years now.

The US Constitution certainly isn't modern or flexible enough to definitively protect (users of) E2EE. There are arguments for their protection, but none is ironclad (like "this is speech that is protected" ironclad). I'm not saying the Bill of Rights was wrong in its time period, but it would be more appropriate to lay out fundamental principles that must be upheld, and protection for E2EE (users) could then be deri…

The first amendment protects speech. Code is speech. E2EE is code. Therefore, the first amendment protects E2EE.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#69
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy. You can make it cost more so it happens less. Encryption is the common example. As far as anybody knows the government can't break e.g. AES. But they can still find out what's on your device because with a warrant they can install surveillance devices in your house to capture it when you enter your passphrase, then sei…

> "Government can never abuse power or government can systemically abuse power" is a false dichotomy. I didn't make it a dichotomy. I was just commenting that "mathematically impossible" is too strong to the point of absurdity. Not fun at parties, but I would hope it's fine on Hacker News. I then provided a rough overview of a system to mitigate abuse. We're not even disagreeing about trying to minimize government ab…

Law enforcement burglarizing your house to install hidden cameras without a warrant is indeed something you would want the system to address, but it's also a much narrower problem, because it's expensive and dangerous. Typically when doing that sort of thing with a warrant, it would be done by a team who e.g. ensures that the homeowner doesn't come back while the cops are in there installing the bug, and who wouldn't go to jail if the suspect's brother unexpectedly shows up just then and catches them -- because they had a warrant.

Whereas anybody can forge a document and submit it to the phone company, and the scope of who is able and willing to abuse that data is very large. So it should be narrowed by not collecting it and forcing access to go via the more expensive route which is less subject to abuse.

Re: Deputy US Marshal pleads guilty to obtaining cell phone location unlawfully [pdf]

#70
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US, as per federal sentencing guidelines[1]: * baseline offense level of 9 [2] * -2 adjustment for acceptance of responsibility[3] * That gets you an offense level of 7, which puts him in the 0-6 months band[4], making him eligible for probation[5]. IANAL but all of this is for offenses that make it to trial. If there's plea bargaining involved the sentences are probably even lighter. [1] https://www.ussc.gov/guideli…

This seems correct regarding this person and this conduct, but I disagree that this type of penalty is "the standard for most first time, non-violent offenses." Federal cases are a small percentage of total criminal prosecutions, and penalties vary widely across the country.

Most first time, non-violent federal offenses, then?
Post reply on HN