TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Cops can easily get months of location data, appeals court rules

70 点作者 pavornyoh将近 9 年前

7 条评论

RKearney将近 9 年前
So it looks like the problem is the third-party doctrine, which is described as &quot;the 1970s-era Supreme Court case holding that there is no privacy interest in data voluntarily given up to a third party like a cell phone provider.&quot;<p>But people aren&#x27;t voluntarily giving cellular providers this data, right? I mean, I never saw that prompt on my phone asking if Verizon could have access to my location.<p>Of course the truth is Verizon&#x2F;AT&amp;T&#x2F;others collect this data every time your phone hits a tower, but how many customers actually understand this? Is it outlined in the service agreement? I&#x27;ll admit I&#x27;ve never actually read the whole thing before and just assumed it was the usual yadda yadda. But even if it did mention they collect location data, could I then opt-out or say I do not consent to have my location monitored and collected? Would that then protect me from data searches? Probably not...<p>I maintain a large amount of Wi-Fi networks in various locations across the US. While we have the ability to monitor the signal strength of every device and use trilateration to obtain a location, we don&#x27;t do this. But, if we did, does that mean anyone our wireless picked up &quot;voluntarily&quot; gave me this data, and then I would have to give it up to law enforcement at a moments notice?<p>I&#x27;m getting really tired of seeing centuries old laws being cited in 2016&#x27;s technology.
评论 #11812127 未加载
评论 #11814857 未加载
评论 #11811943 未加载
评论 #11816609 未加载
评论 #11813564 未加载
评论 #11812056 未加载
bpchaps将近 9 年前
This whole &quot;open data&quot; and &quot;Freedom of information&quot; thing is really falling short on me these days. As I keep going further in attempting to get Chicago&#x27;s office of the mayor&#x27;s communication records, I keep getting more and more push back. 4&#x2F;5 times it&#x27;s essentially, &quot;We don&#x27;t have the infrastructure to make your request possible.&quot; The remainder is either incompetence or &quot;malice&quot;.<p>Why does it take an extreme amount of effort, a year and a half (and counting!) to receive government communications (which is considered within the public domain) when these guys have such amazing ease doing the same towards the general public? It&#x27;s unbelievable.<p>Here&#x27;s part of a response I got today after requesting communications - including email - for six of the numbers&#x27;s communications, derived from [0]:<p><i>The email system’s tool set cannot identify the department where an email user works, and therefore, a search cannot be based on a department. Parameters that would assist the Mayor’s Office in conducting an email search include: (1) the e-mail address of the account you wish searched; and (2) the e-mail address of each individual’s mailbox, if you seek e-mail correspondence to and from two individuals.</i><p>After dozens of these, the only way I read responses like that is, &quot;We&#x27;re not clever enough, or willing enough to work with other departments to help you out. You&#x27;re probably going to give up after this rejection, but if you don&#x27;t, you&#x27;ll give up eventually.&quot;<p>To get around that, I submitted a FOIA request to their IT FOIA group requesting the domain names&#x2F;sent times for all emails sent out of the mayor&#x27;s office. Just so that I can get the the timeframes for the Mayor&#x27;s office to search through.<p>And.. just to add to the fun in attempting to prevent more rejections, another request to their IT department to send me their DNS resolution logs for the timeframe in [0]. Oddly, I don&#x27;t think they can claim unduly burdensome on this one, either, since it&#x27;s just pulling log files with maybe some awk commands and some nslookups on a machine outside their network to check if it&#x27;s in &quot;public domain&quot;.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;spreadsheets&#x2F;d&#x2F;1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTRN8n876KL8aXYYu5it8Lg0g8" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;spreadsheets&#x2F;d&#x2F;1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTR...</a>
评论 #11812251 未加载
Floegipoky将近 9 年前
This seems ridiculous, it&#x27;s pretty clear that the government had enough evidence to justify a warrant to for the location data- they had already obtained one to search the phones. The difference here is purely procedural, of course the court is going to refuse to overturn a guilty verdict just because they asked for a court order instead of a second warrant. And now we have this shitty law.
评论 #11812159 未加载
themartorana将近 9 年前
There should be nothing - NOTHING - that is searchable&#x2F;obtainable without a warrant. The entire point is that more than one person has to review the desire to collect information.<p>Want to draw my BAC? Put a judge on staff at the hospital. The point is not to encourage drunk driving, it&#x27;s that the law gives no single person dominion over another, that one person cannot by force of law exert state-backed power over another.<p>I realize this would set up a bunch of rubber-stamp courts, but even that is light years better than warrantless anything.<p>Edit: the entire point is there are some rights we value over everything - including safety.
评论 #11812370 未加载
评论 #11814957 未加载
评论 #11812413 未加载
kaosjester将近 9 年前
In the near future, criminals will learn to leaves their cellphones at home while committing crimes, using burner phones for any contact they need during that time.<p>Which, incidentally, is advice that the Shadowrun tabletop RPG gives freely as advice to would-be players...
评论 #11811982 未加载
评论 #11812247 未加载
评论 #11813410 未加载
HappyTypist将近 9 年前
What&#x27;s the business justification for retaining cell tower logs for 221 days?!? Surely they can be anonymised after two weeks.
uptown将近 9 年前
So faraday bags when you&#x27;re not using your device? Which ones actually work?
评论 #11812827 未加载
评论 #11812115 未加载
评论 #11812729 未加载