zlacker

[parent] [thread] 34 comments
1. roarch+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-06-12 20:34:24
> Such data may be useful, it says, to “identify every person who attended a protest or rally based on their smartphone location or ad-tracking records.”

"May"? This is exactly how the January 6th protestors were identified.

replies(4): >>some_f+F >>wmered+a7 >>kgwxd+t7 >>weaksa+da
2. some_f+F[view] [source] 2023-06-12 20:37:14
>>roarch+(OP)
I don't doubt that this technique was used for the people who stormed the capital on January 6th, but I would hesitate to describe many of them as "protestors".
replies(2): >>roarch+l2 >>rootus+M8
◧◩
3. roarch+l2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 20:43:11
>>some_f+F
You're free to describe them however you like, it's irrelevant to my point.
replies(2): >>phpist+C4 >>whoopd+Bd
◧◩◪
4. phpist+C4[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 20:52:42
>>roarch+l2
Remember to some people "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets", lots of people are blinded when their perceived political enemies are getting "what they deserve" and fail to understand the powers and tactics used on their political enemies will soon be used on them....

They will then go all shocked pikachu face then the government assault team in their door step taking them way... how can this bee they were the good ones.. they were on the "right side of history"...

Welcome to the system, everyone's a victim Doesn't matter if you're red or blue it hates you all

replies(1): >>hahaha+O9
5. wmered+a7[view] [source] 2023-06-12 21:03:26
>>roarch+(OP)
Yep. It was also used against Occupy Wall Street protestors.
6. kgwxd+t7[view] [source] 2023-06-12 21:04:28
>>roarch+(OP)
Source?
replies(1): >>roarch+h8
◧◩
7. roarch+h8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:07:42
>>kgwxd+t7
https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo...
replies(1): >>kgwxd+tb
◧◩
8. rootus+M8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:10:17
>>some_f+F
Actually, let's do call them protesters. If you want to get universal agreement on the need for privacy regulations, you need to present it a way that does not immediately turn away your intended audience.

When both sides really agree on something, it's amazing how fast it gets done. Which, of course, is why there are people trying to hard to keep both sides from ever agreeing.

replies(1): >>idiots+vc
◧◩◪◨
9. hahaha+O9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:14:55
>>phpist+C4
This is literally what the Seattle populace is now doing after years of screaming "Defund the police". They have come full circle demanding more police presence due to raising crime rates. You get what you protest for or something like it.
10. weaksa+da[view] [source] 2023-06-12 21:16:50
>>roarch+(OP)
doubtful. they were issuing subpoenas to the cell companies for their records of the tower registrations for a certain time frame when crimes were being committed. It doesn't take much to identify the owner of a smartphone via that and then correlate that with driver's license photo ids and correlate that with surveillance camera footage to bring a case. that had nothing to do with peaceful protester tracking but bog standard criminal investigation.
replies(3): >>roarch+Pa >>autoex+ol >>thumbu+F02
◧◩
11. roarch+Pa[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:19:23
>>weaksa+da
I posted the source in another comment but I'll put it here as well: https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo...

The data came from Google and included GPS data.

Either way, I don't think that matters. My point is that tech companies store data that can be used to identify everyone present at a specific location and timeframe, and that data is easily available to the government. There's no "may" about it.

replies(2): >>weaksa+th >>kccqzy+0j
◧◩◪
12. kgwxd+tb[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:22:31
>>roarch+h8
"subpoenaed cell phone data". It's completely justifiable, legally and morally, and been happening since cell phones existed, way before January 6th 2021. The article's claim that it was somehow new to this event shines a spotlight on their agenda.
replies(1): >>zer8k+Fh
◧◩◪
13. idiots+vc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:27:22
>>rootus+M8
On one hand I know that this is true. We have to guard against special pleading that allows oppression of those we disagree with because that inevitably leads to our own oppression sooner or later.

On the other hand I understand what the post you're replying to is saying, even if it's not said extremely well. There is an enormous online narrative with a lot of money and power behind it trying to normalize the most violent and anti-democratic parts of the right wing of American politics and using that to drive views, clicks, and votes.

I'm normally not someone to clutch pearls and will be the first one to acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans are just decent enough people trying to figure out how to keep fed, healthy, and safe. But the tendency toward fascism in the human animal is something we need vigilance against, as demonstrated over and over again in human history.

The people who attempted to violently attack the seat of democratically elected power in this country were not protestors. There were protestors outside, but the people who crossed the line to breaking and entering, assault, and terrorism were not protestors.

◧◩◪
14. whoopd+Bd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:32:50
>>roarch+l2
It's not irrelevant to point out the false equivalency of putting constitutionally protected speech on the same level as forced entry, assault, and destruction of property.
replies(3): >>roarch+ze >>coldte+5k >>graphe+Wn
◧◩◪◨
15. roarch+ze[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:37:26
>>whoopd+Bd
It's irrelevant because my entire and only point is that the government has this capability, no "may" about it.

Whether my choice of words implied the level of ideological purity that you wished to see has nothing to do with that.

◧◩◪
16. weaksa+th[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:51:23
>>roarch+Pa
sure... I don't disagree with you there. they did need to get a subpoena for that information using all the other evidence that was publicly out there on facebook that the affidavit said. they were using an android device that tracks you if you let it and stores that information on google's servers if you let it. you don't have to have that feature on and just having the phone on you is sufficient to be triangulated by the cell towers. I don't see how this is incompatible with modern society. google didn't just give up the data without going through the judge granting a subpoena. even if they didn't have that cell phone record it's just one piece of evidence of many that would still likely get a conviction.

it didn't start at gps data from google... it went from public posts on facebook to the email and phone number account associated with that to the google account associated with that to the gps data associated with the google account. if you show me them using a reach around route to get that gps data and persecute peaceful protestors that haven't been suspected of criminal activity then i do agree it's troubling. if you want me to agree that the government is not within their rights seek evidence via normal, judge approved, subpoenas to investigate/prosecute people storming the capital and doing legitimate crimes then i disagree. you need probable cause and that bar should be fairly high.

replies(1): >>roarch+Cj
◧◩◪◨
17. zer8k+Fh[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:52:03
>>kgwxd+tb
Youre either not well informed or being deliberately obtuse. Cell phone data has been used in individual cases for almost as long as cell phones existed.

J6 was one of the first cases where mass surveillance paired with ad tracking and tower pings were used in combination for mass arrests.

We did not see this when the George Floyd riots occurred Despite the fact federal buildings were attacked yet it was brought out for this. It's very indicative of the existence of a police state that chooses its targets in a politically expedient way.

What we saw the government do and the fact the alleged conspirators have largely not been charged with anything but rather left to rot should terrify anyone. Just because you aren't the target today doesnt mean you won't be tomorrow.

replies(2): >>edmund+fV >>kgwxd+pu2
◧◩◪
18. kccqzy+0j[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 21:58:03
>>roarch+Pa
That's missing the point. Your article says

> investigators obtained GPS and other cell phone records from Google via a search warrant

Search warrants are and remain the correct tool for the government to get this data. What this article is worrying about is the fact that sometimes the government simply purchases this data without any sign off from a judge. That's where constitutional protections are eroded.

Your outrage is misplaced until such time when the government can buy this data from Google without a search warrant.

replies(1): >>roarch+3k
◧◩◪◨
19. roarch+Cj[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:00:08
>>weaksa+th
In the J6 case they used a subpoena, yes. The OP article says that they're now going around the legal process by simply buying the data.

But my point is that the article implies that there's some uncertainty as to whether this data can be used to identify everyone present at a place and time, and there isn't. It has been done before.

◧◩◪◨
20. roarch+3k[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:03:02
>>kccqzy+0j
I'm aware of the distinction. I guess I wasn't clear in my original comment because this keeps coming up: My point is merely that there is absolutely no doubt that once acquired, the data gives the government this capability. The article implies that this is uncertain, and it is not.

> Your outrage is misplaced until such time when the government can buy this data from Google without a search warrant.

Whatever outrage you read into my comments, I assure you it's not there. If you're looking for a fight, look elsewhere.

Also, the OP article is about the government doing exactly that. So if I was outraged, it would be well placed, according to you.

replies(1): >>lern_t+Fr
◧◩◪◨
21. coldte+5k[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:03:11
>>whoopd+Bd
Any protest march and demonstration worth its salt can be described with terms such as "forced entry, assault, and destruction of property" (and has been)...
◧◩
22. autoex+ol[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:09:18
>>weaksa+da
They used a bunch of different tricks to ID some of the people there (and they've still not arrested most of them). The lesson here isn't that they aren't collecting data effectively, or that they aren't able to learn whatever they want, but rather that the data isn't really intended or used for protecting America from attacks or threats or terrorism. It's certainly being used, but not to protect us.
◧◩◪◨
23. graphe+Wn[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:21:55
>>whoopd+Bd
I don't see this sentiment for the George Floyd riots that plagued the whole country for longer and did significantly more damage, instead of caring for corrupt politicians why not persecute those who robbed and stole from the common citizen.

If a protest doesn't make the news what's the point?

replies(1): >>theboo+Js
◧◩◪◨⬒
24. lern_t+Fr[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:41:25
>>roarch+3k
> Also, the OP article is about the government doing exactly that.

The OP article doesn't match the document it describes, which says that the government authorized 5 searches of this data in the past 2.5 years.

replies(1): >>roarch+eu
◧◩◪◨⬒
25. theboo+Js[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:46:10
>>graphe+Wn
You don't see it because you're not looking for it. Plenty of protest groups were extremely vigilant about minimizing property damage and rooting out violent infiltrators.

The George Floyd protests were far more policed: twenty-five protestors died; around 14k were arrested. [1]

Hard to say any 1/6er suffered a similar fate, despite their significantly more egregious apparent crimes.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests

replies(1): >>graphe+Rt
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
26. graphe+Rt[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:53:32
>>theboo+Js
Do you not see the irony of your post? Did you not see the same at the 1/6? If they were more policed, the fires, and destruction didn't help it make it appear so. I could see the Floyd protests/riots outside. 1/6 affected some .1% of the elite I could care less about.

I'm still trying to see a reason why the common man hates that the citizens protest the government, or cares so much for the corrupt elite of either party. The government is not your friend. If the Floyd protests went to Washington it could have been less 1996 and more MLK.

replies(1): >>theboo+Ju
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
27. roarch+eu[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:55:53
>>lern_t+Fr
Are you sure about that? See Section 2.2 of the report, "Examples of CAI Contracts" that says "The IC currently acquires a large amount of CAI" and goes on to list specific data brokers contracted by specific government agencies. What am I missing?
replies(1): >>lern_t+Kw
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
28. theboo+Ju[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 22:58:07
>>graphe+Rt
I don't know how to tell you that there were George Floyd protests in DC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests_in_Washi....

Somehow they managed to avoid breaking into the Capitol building and rifling through the offices of Congresscritters.

replies(1): >>graphe+Xw
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
29. lern_t+Kw[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 23:08:09
>>roarch+eu
The data brokers it contracts are pretty harmless, like getting business data from Dun & Bradstreet or getting military information from Janes Online. These data brokers aggregate publicly available information that you or I could find for free by accessing the right web pages. The only potential 4th Amendment violation, the one the article pretends is happening on a mass scale, is from purchase of mobile location data. The document says that the provider doesn't remove US data, so the government does that itself because accessing that data without due process would be a 4th Amendment violation. Due process was also followed when the government obtained location information from Google.
replies(1): >>roarch+lz
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
30. graphe+Xw[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 23:09:29
>>theboo+Ju
To reiterate my point in the original post: If a protest doesn't make the news what's the point?

1/6 hurt Trump, and the Floyd riots hurt the BLM cause. If only either of them did something positive with the attention. One affected me and the people around me, the other could have happened on Mars to billionaire reptiles. I couldn't care less for those elites.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
31. roarch+lz[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-12 23:22:20
>>lern_t+Kw
Ah I see it, looks like you're right:

> DIA currently provides funding to another agency that purchases commercially available geolocation metadata aggregated from smartphones. The data DIA receives is global in scope and is not identified as “U.S. location data” or “foreign location data” by the vendor at the time it is provisioned to DIA. DIA processes the location data as it arrives to identify U.S. location data points that it segregates in a separate database. DIA personnel can only query the U.S. location database when authorized through a specific process requiring approval from the Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office of Oversight and Compliance (OOC), and DIA senior leadership. Permission to query the U.S. device location data has been granted five times in the past two-and-a-half years for authorized purposes.

It's worth noting that they do collect the data up front, and only querying it is restricted. But I suppose having to follow due process for that part is better than nothing.

replies(1): >>jkaplo+mz1
◧◩◪◨⬒
32. edmund+fV[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-13 02:01:46
>>zer8k+Fh
I understand it might appear this way to someone who already has specific political leanings, but as someone without a dog in this fight - that does not appear supported by the evidence. Your conclusions reveal more about your priors than anything else.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
33. jkaplo+mz1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-13 07:13:25
>>roarch+lz
How do they handle the Fourth Amendment rights of US citizens abroad, like me? My understanding is that those rights must be respected even abroad by US governmental entities when they know or reasonably should know that data they might search or seize belongs to a US citizen.

And if this data includes sufficient identifying info, they should be able to identify me as a US citizen. Even phone number would be enough, since I think that and my US social security number are together in various public data breach datasets.

(Yes, my US phone number should be generating foreign location data. I have two eSIMs simultaneously active, one US and one foreign. For odd reasons I don’t think I have proper roaming working for the US number where I am now, but it does work via Wi-Fi calling which does share the country info with the carrier - and I have had international roaming working at other times.)

Why should my SSN indicate citizenship, some might wonder? SSA certainly knows I was granted my SSN years ago as a newborn citizen, and the Department of State knows I hold a current US passport and have never relinquished my US citizenship.

◧◩
34. thumbu+F02[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-13 11:03:12
>>weaksa+da
The irony is they could have just bought the cellphone data. That's literally for sale. Maybe there was some legal reason they couldn't use it directly but it's already out there.
◧◩◪◨⬒
35. kgwxd+pu2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-13 13:49:41
>>zer8k+Fh
Stop comparing January 6th with BLM. They're not even close to equivalent situations, in fact, they're complete opposites. BLM = Agent of the government murdered a citizen in the streets, citizens got angry. J6 = The highest agent of the government encouraged a mob of citizens to physically attack their political opponents.

There were tens of thousands of arrest during BLM. The national guard were sent in. Undercover agents of the government were throwing people into unmarked vehicles. The people at J6 walked home with love and well wishes from the standing president of The United States government. However, they were dumb enough to bring tracking devices and fully document themselves committing treason. That doesn't point to some deep state agenda, it's just plain idiocy.

[go to top]