I’ve posted before my concerns about loss of privacy. I last spoke about being able to locate people, along with all kinds of personal information, utilizing the numerous locator services available online.
Now we find out our phone records are for sale. I feel so violated. And even though I personally don’t have any calls that would reveal much about me, I’m sure many people do. And they have a right to have these records remain private and not available to every Tom, Dick, and Harry, even if they are having an affair, calling their bookie or drug dealer, or their psychiatrist.
Think about how many phone calls are made in a day.
Think about how many phone calls are recorded or taped or saved.
Think about what idiot is going to listen to all those calls.
Think it might be done by voice recognition equipment looking for key words … like ‘grocery store’ and ‘pick up Jimmy at school’ and ‘did you hear about Mary’s affair?’ and …
Anyone can listen to most any information sent through radio waves, all you need to is build a receiver.
You can get an encryption phone… Your neighbor might balk at the expense and figure what you have to say is not worth the cost. But hey, you’ll be safe… cept from the government… Bawahahaha
So, if you get rich in years to come and you decide to have an affair with your golf instructor, you might be upset if your wife hires a private detective and he buys a list of all your phone calls including all your calls to said golf instructor and the judge gives your wife half of your assets.
Make sure you look at the link I posted. This doesn’t have to do with intercepting phone calls. It has to do with buying lists of all phone calls made.
I just read the whole article.
It is about numbers called, not the content of the calls.
It is about one named company in Chicago. ( Crooks in Chicago… go figure )
I saw no accusations about Cingular™, Verizon™, Sprint™ or any other big name.
If something can be abused, it will be.
My underpants are still nice and smooth…
YMMV
It seems as though you either project what you want onto what you read or you have a serious problem with reading comprehension:
[ul]
[li]First of all, it was clear in the OP that this has nothing to do with the content of calls, assuming you understand what “phone records” means.[/li][li]Second of all, although only one service is mentioned in the article (locatecell.com), the second sentence of the article is: “Dozens of online services are selling lists of cell phone calls, raising security concerns among law enforcement and privacy experts.”[/li][li]Third of all, while it is the Chicago Police Department that is issuing the alert, “Representatives of Data Find Solutions Inc., the Tennessee-based operator of Locatecell.com, could not be reached for comment.” If you go to their website, you’ll find that all you need is a cell phone number.[/li][li]Finally, no one made any accusations regarding any company; the point is that this is legal and available to anyone who puts up the money. [/li][/ul]
While I usually don’t care about privacy issues, this situation is ridiculous. From the article, these groups don’t even have the right to look at the records at all, they pretend to be you and convince the provider to give up the record. Hopefully, Chuck Schumer can get some traction with this and make it illegal.
Am I right in thinking that the police would need a warrant to get these records? To have that same information made easily available to anyone who knows your phone number is frightening.
This isn’t some institution getting compiled, semi-anonymous records for high level marketing or data analysis. This is highly personal data, kept individual and given to someone who apparently does want data about you specifically.
You may not be alone in this opinion…but I’m not on your side. Plus, your example is of someone doing something morally questionable. You get upset cause you’re screwing around behind your wife and you get caught? oof. No sympathy from me.
I’m in the ‘you never really had privacy in the first place’ camp. Course, if you don’t do anything to raise suspicion abouve the noise level, you’re golden.
Listen. I’m the network security guy at our office. I_CAN_SEE_EVERYTHING_ON_OUR_NETWORK. Don’t give me a reason to go looking.
According to the law, I can’t ask certain questions. I can’t ask if Billy has kids or plans to have kids. But hey, if Billy’s cell number is on the resume, I can look for calls to a daycare!
I can’t really ask for private medical information like “how have you been feeling lately? Do you miss a lot of days being sick?” but if I see several calls to a local oncologist, I know that Billy or someone in their family may have cancer. That could mean missing work a lot-- I might choose to hire someone else if I have a choice.
And sure, if Billy wants to volunteer the information about the kids or the cancer, that’s fine, but providing one’s cell phone number as a means of contact should not mean the other person has permission to find out who else you call.
To my thinking, the problem isn’t telephone records per se, but the cumulative privacy violations that today allow data miners and their ilk to know waaay too much about me and you.
The amount of information available for sale–always for sale, of course–is chilling. Meanwhile, our fearless leaders on Capitol Hill are sitting on their asses doing nothing though, in reality, it might be too late. The genie is already out of the bottle and on thousands of servers.
Imagine the day when everyone’s medical records will be electronically stored and transmitted–a system devised by the same brains that today guard the Swiss-cheese corporate world.
I’ve said this before elsewhere. I used to be a Revenue Officer with IRS and had access to not only the information in your tax returns, but any information about you. It was only the phone company that used to balk at giving me copies of personal checks used to pay phone bills so I could get your account number and levy your bank account; they wanted a judge involved. Well, as we can see with the advent of cell phone and numerous phone companies this is a thing of the past. And now anything is for sale.
I personally don’t believe that if someone is violating your moral code they lose their right to privacy.
At sometime in your life you will regret not caring if the guy next door can buy your life on the internet. And that of your children.
Okay, I get it. You want it illegal. Fine, I do to. whoop
So, I am an employer and have 25 good applications for a position above the janitor slot.
I’m now going to buy all the records I can about everything I can about those 25 people looking to see who goes to the doctor the most.
I can’t buy content, just number logs is what you are all saying, so now I need a program to convert all those numbers in lists of who they are and stuff and such for all 25 folks. ???
All 25 are so close, I’m going to spend this much time and $$$$ to check you out? …Right…
I am doing something I am not supposed to and don’t use a throw away phone = I am so stupid I should be caught.
I am applying for a job and give my cell number knowing this is going on… I don’t deserve the job.
Yes, this should be illegal. You think that is going to stop the practice?
Be better and easier to force though more laws ( just what we need ) to force the providers not make any log for any reason and if they are found to be in violation they have an automatic 15 Million dollar fine and we sic the IRS on them where you are guilty until you prove you are innocent… The IRS, as explained above, does not even need a warrant to get normally private information, they just make a call or use the government spy network.
Why does not the government just go in and get the list of people who have bought the lists and charge them with invasion of privacy? Do it through the IRS and then it is a win / win as the bad guys have to do all the work and provide all thew $$$$ to prove they are innocent. That is an ‘EXPECTED’ area of privacy and I’m sure SCOTUS will jump at the chance to fix this little problem.
Gus this isn’t about an employer grabbing these logs for 25 applicants. This is about your psycho ex GF pulling the log and harassing your current GF. This is about being in the middle of a divorce and having the other side poking into your personal business. This is about your nosy neighbor finding out everyone you talked to over the last year.
As the article mentioned, we have protection from this for our financial data, but it does not extend to phone logs. Simpler, IMHO, to expand that law to other aspects of personal data than to attempt enforcement of a non-existant law and hope the courts support you.
Or, more appropriately, the law will evolve to cover that eventuality. The Tech ALWAYS leads the law. The problem here is: There’s SO much meta-information out there that removing ONE thing (public access to phone records) ISN’T going to solve the problem.
Unless or until you incinerate your garbage, pull your wifi, get off the grid, and move to the mountains, there will ALWAYS be information about you out there.
Hyperventilating about it is about as productive as pushing against the breeze.
Many jobs require a background check, if your health or kids show up, how can you prove that was why you didn’t get the job?
Got a website? Does it have pics of the kids? Don’t need phone records to determine your family status. You’re on this site, by that very fact you have left information that compromises your privacy.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10740935/
I didn’t know the government could open personal mail without a warrant. It’s even more alarming when there is no criteria that can be divulged to define what mail is to be opened. I wonder if they are watching this professor and getting his phone records as well. Since Al Qaeda is well funded and by all accounts highly sophisticated I highly doubt they would be sending secret coded plans to attack the U.S. in a letter via this professor. I think it’s stupid and outrageous that taxpayer’s money is spent to do idiotic stuff like this. Some goober in a uniform is reading your personal mail?
Nor did I, thank you for pointing it out. (Though according to the article, it’s limited to “All mail originating outside the United States Customs territory that is to be delivered inside the U.S. Customs territory”.) I like this:
Recent incidents have a deliciously Kafka-esque tinge to them, don’t they?
Given your previous role (which I presume you carried out without too many compunctions), why do you suddenly feel so ‘violated’ to find out that simple lists of called numbers are recorded?