News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The FBI's internal guide for getting data from AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon. Parent comment

Re:The FBI's internal guide for getting data from AT&T, T-Mo... by xmprt on Tuesday October 26, 2021 @12:16AM (#28996329)
This may be a controversial opinion, but I think some level of surveillance can be good for people. If you are convicted for a crime, you should be able to use records to prove your innocence (eg. cell tower logs to show that you were nowhere near the murder and had an alibi). We already have this where traffic cameras can show who was responsible for car crashes.

However, a lot of current surveillance is more about snooping. That's where it crosses the line for me. I guess it comes down to ownership. I should own the text messages and call logs because I have access to them. AT&T can own the cell tower logs because they own the cell towers.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The FBI's internal guide for getting data from AT&T, T-Mo... by gzer0 on Tuesday October 26, 2021 @01:53AM (#28996868)
It is particulary controversial for a reason.

https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-algorithm...

> Employees can and do modify the location or number of shots fired at the request of police, according to court records.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The FBI's internal guide for getting data from AT&T, T-Mo... by citizenpaul on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @02:18AM (#29010087)
Not really controversial but ignorant of how real life law enforcement works. You will never find yourself using tracking data to prove your innocence, that is TV/Hollywood fluff.

You will find yourself on the short list of suspects because you were in the area of a crime. If you actually read some news you will also find that it is often because one of the law enforcement decided their "gut" feeling was you are most guilty loooking and now they have a solid starting piece of evidence to use against you.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The FBI's internal guide for getting data from AT&T, T-Mo... by raxxorrax on Tuesday October 26, 2021 @04:03AM (#28997616)
It is certainly controversial, but also not very perspicacious. Towards whom do you need to prove your innocence? Against a encroaching state that convicts without evidence? Well, governments are guilty of that, sure. But then that is a problem in dire need of fixing, not tools that maybe provide you an alibi when stars align correctly. An alibi you shouldn't need in the first place.
[ Parent | on HN ]