Government Now Wants SMS Retention Laws On Top of ISP Browsing Retention Laws As the United States government continues its relentless expansion of domestic surveillance capabilities, the latest effort is focused on forcing wireless carriers to retain text message logs for at least two years. For much of the last decade the U.S. government has been trying to force data retention requirements on ISPs, most frequently under the banner of fighting child pornography. That's something that some folks (like Sonic.net CEO Dane Jasper) has argued will create huge new security vulnerabilities. Now law enforcement and the government are also focusing their attention on forcing wireless carriers to retain SMS logs, insisting that the lack of a current requirement (as they claim with the lack of ISP logs) "can hinder law enforcement investigations." The Justice Department claims that carrier practices on SMS retention differ wildly: An internal Justice Department document (PDF) that the ACLU obtained through the Freedom of Information Act shows that, as of 2010, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint did not store the contents of text messages. Verizon did for up to five days, a change from its earlier no-logs-at-all position, and Virgin Mobile kept them for 90 days. The carriers generally kept metadata such as the phone numbers associated with the text for 90 days to 18 months; AT&T was an outlier, keeping it for as long as seven years, according to the chart. analysis suggests that the Juctice Department's data is wrong, noting that Sprint and others have been shown to retain full SMS messages for some time. Meanwhile the EFF, as you might expect, isn't impressed with this latest push: "These data retention policies serve one purpose: to require companies to keep databases on their customers so law enforcement can fish for evidence," he said. "And this would seem to be done against the wishes of the providers, presumably, since...some of the providers don't keep SMS messages at all."
|
 | | Wow, I can't see this being abused... I'm getting that feeling that we're just supposed to be good little workers and never step out of line... | |
|  | | | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... Don't understand why we everyone isn't required to wear little audio recording devices and GPS trackers that track and record everything.
You know, because not having this "can hinder law enforcement investigations." | |
| | | | | | |  SmokeyI'd rather be skiingPremium
join:2003-05-20
Wild West
 ·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... With a warrant, I can get access to your land line records and record your conversations.
With that same warrant, I can get the same results from your cellphone calls and emails.
That same warrant however can not get text messages that you sent*, unless the provider stores them * on an active surveillance warrant real time texts can be intercepted and stored but this does little to show past criminal activity on that phone
The purpose of this is to keep the playing field even across telecos. Just like the above story says, some keep records, some don't. This is not a secret to those who use these services for criminal activity.
--
Para Bellum!! | |
| | | | | | | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... said by Smokey:With a warrant, I can get access to your land line records and record your conversations.
With that same warrant, I can get the same results from your cellphone calls and emails.
That same warrant however can not get text messages that you sent*, unless the provider stores them * on an active surveillance warrant real time texts can be intercepted and stored but this does little to show past criminal activity on that phone
The purpose of this is to keep the playing field even across telecos. Just like the above story says, some keep records, some don't. This is not a secret to those who use these services for criminal activity.
I totally agree. If you want to keep the playing field among telcos then let's do it. We'll have the same sort of retention system we have now with voice. No records are kept unless there's a warrant.
Why place everyone under surveillance who's not under a warrant? | |
| | | | | | sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
1 edit | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... said by nothing00:Why place everyone under surveillance who's not under a warrant?
Simple comrade, it is easy to track political dissidents this way. | |
| | | | | | | | said by nothing00:said by Smokey:With a warrant, I can get access to your land line records and record your conversations.
With that same warrant, I can get the same results from your cellphone calls and emails.
That same warrant however can not get text messages that you sent*, unless the provider stores them * on an active surveillance warrant real time texts can be intercepted and stored but this does little to show past criminal activity on that phone
The purpose of this is to keep the playing field even across telecos. Just like the above story says, some keep records, some don't. This is not a secret to those who use these services for criminal activity.
I totally agree. If you want to keep the playing field among telcos then let's do it. We'll have the same sort of retention system we have now with voice. No records are kept unless there's a warrant. Why place everyone under surveillance who's not under a warrant? how do you know you are under investigation or have a warrant? other than a bench warrant that is served in person to you. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm oh snap you dont! comrade! | |
|
| | | | | | said by Smokey:With a warrant, I can get access to your land line records and record your conversations.
But you can't get a recording of a conversation that's already happened. Although I'm sure that's on the wish list of these sleazy politicians as well. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| Bit of a stretch there. The United States has one of the worst organized crime and homicide rates of any developed country. In addition, more and more of the country now resembles a lawless 3rd world country, yet we continue to be paranoid about law enforcement.
As with anything nowadays, I prefer to look to advanced nations that are beating us and examine (learn) how they are doing things. Evidently, 3rd world nations and ourselves are left with a paranoia against law enforcement; with folks in both failing to connect the dots as to why both are crime-ridden. | |
| | | | | | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... Paranoia? Why? Because just because they make up evidence, lie to protect one another, tase and beat people for no reason, go on fishing expeditions (Petraeus is a good example), have (with enthusiastic cooperation of the DA's office) put countless innocent people behind bars, act as revenue offices instead of protecting the public good, review people's phone records and email with no oversight or justification, and...?
Left to their own judgement they'll do terrible things out of expediency and simply because some of them are terrible people. They need laws governing their behavior just as much as the rest of us. In fact, more so because they have much greater authority.
Something about great power and great responsibility should come to mind. | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Callcentric
| Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... Versus the alternative, where the private sector (individuals), Wall street ,and criminals run amok, without any accountability whatsoever.
Like I pointed out, we have to models in action here. One model, is used by advanced first world nations, where there is rational and logical law enforcement.
Then you have the 3rd world / American model, where there is little government and no proactive law enforcement. The end result of the two approaches, in 2012, speaks for itself.
Our approach has failed miserably at dealing with crime and it's little surprise that more and more of America now coincidentally resembles a crime-ridden 3rd world country - this is reality. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... I don't like your alternative. I'm happy to live in a world where I'm afraid of the evil deeds of criminals rather than the evil deeds of authorities. | |
| | | | | | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| said by Telco: Evidently, 3rd world nations and ourselves are left with a paranoia against law enforcement;
Yeah, paranoia... tell that to the folks at »www.innocenceproject.org/ | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Callcentric
| Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... For starters, 96% of those cases on the site occurred prior to the 00's. Forensics have improved rapidly since then, but of course is still not perfect. Really life isn't CSI after all.
Not to mention, if you weigh up the number of cases that go unsolved versus those committed wrongly, it's probably in the 0.000X%.
Look at all of the homicides that go unsolved every single year. Now compare them to advanced cities like London, where Cameras line the streets. London has more people living in a higher density (more chance of crime), than almost every single American city combined. Yet, their homicide rate per capita is a fraction of Chicago.
I remember seeing a guy beaten and robbed during the protests in London. The cameras recorded the incident and the dirt-bag was caught and he was charged.
No chance in hell would he have been caught in most of our dilapidated cities, as there isn't the means there to find and convict them. It's why gangs and organized crime are so rampant, in every single one of our cities. | |
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... said by Telco:For starters, 96% of those cases on the site occurred prior to the 00's. Forensics have improved rapidly since then, but of course is still not perfect. Really life isn't CSI after all. Not to mention, if you weigh up the number of cases that go unsolved versus those committed wrongly, it's probably in the 0.000X%. Oh well, that makes it acceptable.. killing the wrong guy, woohoo! Put em in jail for life, while the actual criminal walks just because law enforcement wanted somebody.. that is a-ok! | |
|
| | | | | What advanced nations are you talking about? And what, specifically not generally, makes them advanced in this case? | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Callcentric
| Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... said by music4praise:What advanced nations are you talking about? And what, specifically not generally, makes them advanced in this case?
Western Europe, Scandinavian countries, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc etc etc.
Their quality of life, modern infrastructure, low crime rates, robust economies, low rates of poverty and so forth make them advanced.
| |
| | | | | | clone
join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN | Re: Wow, I can't see this being abused... So, let me get this straight, these countries are more "advanced" than the United States because they have allowed the police state in?
*chuckles at your naivete*
I'd rather have liberty in a hellhole than a utopian police state, thank you very much. | |
| | | | | | sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
| said by Telco:said by music4praise:What advanced nations are you talking about? And what, specifically not generally, makes them advanced in this case?
Western Europe, Scandinavian countries, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc etc etc. Their quality of life, modern infrastructure, low crime rates, robust economies, low rates of poverty and so forth make them advanced. Yes, because the decades running recession, cultural tendency to be conformist, and strict laws on owning anything more deadly than a steak knife have nothing to do with that (at least in the case of Japan).
As far as poverty goes, you must be joking, Western Europe has more people on welfare per capita than the United States. In addition Western Europe is facing the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression, and many of the Western European nations are facing stagnant economies and the risk of defaulting on their loans.
Spain: Population 47,190,493
Unemployed Over 5,000,000 (9.5%)
Population living below the poverty line: 19.8%
United States: Population 311,591,917
Unemployed Around 24,600,000 (7.9%)
Population living below the poverty line: 15%
Japan: Population living below the poverty line: 16%
Unemployed: 4.2%
Germany: Population living below the poverty line: 15.5%
Unemployed 5.4%
Those countries aren't the utopias the media and you believe them to be. | |
| | | | | | | | I've lived in the UK, Japan, and spent significant time in over 20 other countrys.
"Telco" is simply blinded by anti-American bias. The grass is not always greener on the other side.
First of all, most of Western Europe is suffering from terrible economic performance, with enormous unemploymnet rates. The UK, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and most other countrys on his list are economic basket cases. Japan has been in trouble for over a decade. Scandanvian countries are always cited by liberals as model countries, yet they ignore the fact that these populations are miniscule. The population of all the Scandanavian countrys combined do not equal that of a single large US city. They are also culturally homogenous, which makes establishing and agreeing on societal norms of behaviour much easier. Scandanavian countrys also benefit from the enormous revenues generated by selling off natural resources, especially oil, but also fish, timber, and minerals.
Most American's would be appalled at some of the conditions average Europeans have to contend with. There's plenty to like in Europe, but it's not the fantasyland some like to portray. | |
|
| | | clone
join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN | People are paranoid about law enforcement in 3rd world countries because law enforcement in 3rd world countries are the employees of despotic tyrants. The same thing is happening here, which is why you are seeing the same results. Despotic tyrants breed crime.
Correlation does not indicate causation. I think, however, that you probably know that full well. | |
| | | | | |
| | | | It's called a cell phone (gps inside). Your wireless provider already tracks your movement patterns to sell the data to advertisers. | |
| | | | |
| |  tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI | said by nothing00:Don't understand why we everyone isn't required to wear little audio recording devices and GPS trackers that track and record everything.
You know, because not having this "can hinder law enforcement investigations."
They have yet to figure out how to make the battery last more then 90 days.  Once they do, look out.  | |
|
| | | I would expect SMART criminals to use some form of encrypted and possibly P2P instant-messaging rather than SMS. | |
| | |
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Prove It It is incumbent upon the government to show us even ONE prosecution of a criminal that failed due to not having this information.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won. | |
| | | | Re: Prove It it's impossible to prove a negative. | |
| | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Prove It said by ArrayList:it's impossible to prove a negative.
It is impossible to prove an untestable negative condition. But for any other type of negative condition, provided that the universe of testable conditions is a closed one, such conditions can and are proven. It happens in computer science every day.
But my proposal is certainly not untestable. Surely law enforcement can provide a list of cases in which a lack of text message logs resulted in an accused person being acquitted. I'd even apply the same test to these of unmanned aerial drones by state and local law enforcement.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won. | |
|
 LightSPremium
join:2005-12-17
Greenville, TX | Why? Anybody else notice AT&T was at the top?
I don't think this is a good idea at all.  | |
| | | Burden of Proof...in the SMS How many execs have given insider info via blackberry or other device and not been caught?
Or texting while driving...if there was cause for other incidents, 90 days is too short.
Or with divorce cases, where spouse was texting and cheating...
I'm surprised this wasn't covered under Sarbanes-Oxley Act...
--
Splat | |
|  fuziwuziNot born yesterdayPremium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA | China? Why don't we just let China run the communications (internet, mobile, TV, etc.) for everyone since it seems the US gov't. is hell-bent on turning our services into what China already has.
--
Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1 | |
| | | | Re: China? I think we've already been handed over to the same goons who run Chinas telecom. | |
| | | | | Re: China? U would be amazed the wars governments will wage over ones assets and intellectual property. Like hitler desperate for Einstein. Part of the entertainment as all ambitions of ones soul are raped and plundered for the necessary tragedy needed to make all problems so bad no one will ever be able to recover from the abuse. | |
|
| | | China is too sloppy and primitive. The USA must be #1! | |
|
| | Hello FBI, CIA NSA et al None of you need my SMS, email or facebook Twitter etc. data so knock it off. It's bad enough that your TSA henchmen practically make me strip down and submit to cavity searches to fly the unfriendly skies of the USA. Get a F#$KING warrant outlining WHY you need my information otherwise get the hell out of my face and my life. We are not Communist China or Syria (yet). | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
·KCH Cable
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| money for nothing One more stream of data to fill hard drives with in the upcoming data center in Utah (»www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/0···acenter/)
The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.” | |
| Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
| New technology offeres new opportunity to snoop! We are back where we were in the 1890's when the police could just enter a home or business and begin snooping around. That was before the requirement that the police obtain a search warrant before entering private property. Then came the telephone when the police began unsupervised monitoring of telephone lines. The police were eventually cut off by laws protecting privacy.
Currently if wiretapping does not find illegal activities there is always the the tip off to the morality monitors by the police that can get victims fired or evicted through public pressure. Gone is freedom of speech. The problem here is that lawmakers lack the knowledge to understand the real issues related to technology. Remember the Internet is a series of Tubes.
Occasionally a brief parting of the clouds occurs and the government lawmakers put police on a short leash. I hope it happens sooner rather than later. | |
| | | They already retain our text messages..... Nothing new here. Assume nothing is private if it leaves your mouth or you act it out. Hell, technology may exist to read our minds.
--
A citizen of The United States of Amnesia. How quickly we forget. | |
| | |
 WiseOldNerdDe gustibus non est disputandumPremium
join:2001-11-25
Phoenix, AZ | The End Draweth Nigh Communicators of the world unite, we have nothing to lose but the chains of government snooping. Who shall rid us of these political poltroons?
--
My perception is REALITY | |
| | |
sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 | If you give a mouse a cookie... We need to stop feeding the mice. | |
| | |
 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
·RoadRunner Cable
·magicjack.com
| Greeting Comrads. Welcome to the great and wonderful United states of amerika. Where we sing land of the free, but it's becoming anything but.
Interesting how "For the children" or "To prevent terrorism" is used as key phrases to strip freedom away in the disguise of security. In all they are doing is trying to make us more like a puppet state every year.
ISPs retaining browser histories, really? How much is storage, and how many storage farms will they need.
And now they want SMS retained?
the government must be really stupid. Sure they'll catch some stupid criminals, but the smart ones have already moved onto something else, or is it back to something else?
Sneaker net, want ads, etc.
Meanwhile big comrade brother must secure the internets for our children. Ya, right, and I have a chunk of the moon for sale, plus proof the moon is made up of cheese. And not just any cheese but nice crumbly blue cheese.
But hey, this is what the people want, as the people voted these comrades into office.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?. | |
| |  NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Greeting Comrads. said by Snakeoil:Ya, right, and I have a chunk of the moon for sale, plus proof the moon is made up of cheese. And not just any cheese but nice crumbly blue cheese.
Shouldn't that be green (as in young; unaged) cheese?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | Patriot Act makes me feel much safer. Just more encroachment on personal privacy with no requirement for a warrant. | |
| ratatosk
join:2010-03-26
New Westminster, BC | Time to get serious about encryption. It is really time to get serious about encryption. The tools exist. TextSecure/Redphone. Silent Circle. OTR capable chat clients like Gibberbot and IM+. | |
| | |  NickDPremium
join:2000-11-17
Princeton Junction, NJ
·Comcast
| Re: Funding? It's about 21 million texts per gigabyte. Which seems like a lot of text messages, but when you consider how many users there are, and how many texts are sent every month, the database will be measured in the hundreds of terabytes. It's going to take a lot of computing resources to maintain that database, plus they'd have to hire additional employees to deal with law enforcement access requests. The carriers could analyze the content of the texts and sell relevant advertising to monetize that database, but the backlash would be damaging for the company's image. | |
| | |
| | For two years? Really? These guys want everything on a platter and spoon fed. Why should tax payers foot the bill that lowers their privacy? How about seven days and if you can get a warrant for the person the provider will keep a log until needed?
Unreal. Let's store a bunch of garbage in the hopes we stumble upon a criminal. Good logic. I can see these guys catching the bad guys real quick if they are this desperate and bad.
There are all kinds of records that can be accessed without even warrants ever since Patriot Act and other crap. In my opinion NOTHING should be allowed to be accessed without a warrant. What kind of retarded logic is fishing and hoping something drops on their lap? How about doing real investigating and then once they have reason getting a warrant for additional evidence against a criminal?
I'm not against them having the ability to access the information. I am against the idea of putting all the information readily out there with little privacy. Mass information can lead this to be useful for other people besides law enforcement. Storing credit cards seems like a good idea, until the website database is hacked, and then the information is spread over the net. Not to mention the ability of corrupt employees to sell your info. No thanks. I like the privacy until real evidence surfaces. After that person should not be entitled to that privacy anymore after a warrant is issued. | |
|
| |
|
|
·