FBI Rejects Freedom of Information Act Request About Carrier IQ 156
bonch writes with news that website Muckrock recently sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the FBI asking for "manuals, documents or other written guidance used to access or analyze data gathered by programs developed or deployed by Carrier IQ." The Bureau has now responded with a rejection of the request, claiming an exemption applies because such documents "could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings." While many have been quick to assume the worst, the Muckrock article says it's unclear "whether the FBI used Carrier IQ's software to in its own investigations, whether it is currently investigating Carrier IQ, or whether it is some combination of both - not unlikely given the recent uproar over the practice coupled with the U.S. intelligence communities reliance on third-party vendors."
I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Funny)
A government agency does not want to hand over information that may link it to abusing its power. I've never heard of such a thing. Maybe Eric Holder is advising them as to handle the situation.
Perhaps Putin made some of his fortune as an adviser.
being an ex-cagey bee and all...
These Are Not The Androids You're Looking For (Score:5, Funny)
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order, and will be asked to leave the future, immediately.
Re:I'm stunned (Score:4, Informative)
Notably, both Stalin's regime and entire Stasi organisation have been significantly less successful at monitoring people. We long past the point where even those comparisons in terms of monitoring would be appropriate. To try to whine about Putin, who actually failed at any significant monitoring of his people (as in comparison to both above) shows extreme depth of ignorance in the subject. As it stands now, top countries in terms of monitoring their citizens are located in the West, and the gap between them and others is more of a huge chasm.
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
Citations?
The KGB and Stasi were remarkably successful at what they did. Yes, I know that the US is moving beyond their example, but how far down that road are we? IMO, the UK is much further along than the US is. And, you could probably make a case for the UK surpassing the USSR. But, citations are in order, if you make that attempt. Not to mention, any attempts to quantify and to qualify the comparisons might be suspect. Are there records available somewhere, documenting how many Stasi there were, and how frequently they monitored each citizen? Can we check their reliability in identifying "enemies of the state"?
Your final sentence is almost certainly correct. But, how do we verify that?
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Interesting)
Stasi was capable actively monitoring every SEVENTH citizen of GDDR. This number was derived directly from their archives, and can be found in a number of currently in-print history books, along with proper sourcing. KGB was significantly weaker in this, in no small part due to the fact that much of USSR didn't even have telephone lines and proper roads until late 70s. The country was just so damn big and sparsely populated. Finally, there was the major problem of management - even if you gathered information like Stasi did, you ended up fucked by the fact that you didn't have resources to process it.
There are multiple cases of people from companies like Palantir (use google to find citations that haven't been pulled yet due to DMCA or other ways they use to pull them off public websites) stating that not only do US/UK currently monitor EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN, they are officially marketing themselves as companies that have tools that can turn this huge influx of informational mess into useful datasets. In other words they've seen the data, and know that it's a mess due to sheer amounts of it. Which is the main reason why Stasi could only dream of having systems like this in place. Computers powerful enough, networking powerful enough and social incentives for people to put their daily lives into recordable, automatically sortable format simply weren't there in their times.
I can't find it any more, but I have seen a really nice presentation from Palantir specifically stating all above points that I saw either on wired or ars (or linked from one of their articles on the topic). I'm not sure they still have it though, as it may have gotten pulled on copyright grounds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While we're at it, let's install key loggers on all PCs. You know, just in case they need it for "enforcement proceedings".
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Interesting)
The only thing we know for sure is that the companies that installed this iCarrier spyware definitely abused their power.
If the abuse goes up to the FBI, then there's no way that information is not going to come out. We'll know soon enough where iCarrier came from and where we should aim our ire. The iCarrier story is just getting started.
Re: (Score:3)
Are you trying to subliminally link this to Apple for some reason? The company name is Carrier IQ. No clue what iCarrier is and Google only finds 4 pages with both terms so I am betting that iCarrier is not the name of their software product.
The Carrier IQ software is a cross platform problem that seems to be associated with the carriers and headset makers, including both Android and Apple devices.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that was just a mistake on my part.
Although Apple is listed in the Wikipedia article about Carrier IQ as one of three companies that had installed Carrier IQ on their products. It also says that it is not included in iOS 5.
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing we know for sure is that the companies that installed this iCarrier spyware definitely abused their power.
If the abuse goes up to the FBI, then there's no way that information is not going to come out. We'll know soon enough where iCarrier came from and where we should aim our ire. The iCarrier story is just getting started.
You know i love you like i do my brothers PopeRatzo, but wtf is iCarrier?
You making shit up again?
This discussion is about Carrier IQ, not whatever you are talking about.
Re: (Score:3)
Not this time.
It was an honest mistake, which I've explained above. Just one of those things. Not that there isn't something out there called iCarrier, but that's not what I was referring to.
Sometimes, when I get really going, and my dudgeon has been sufficiently elevated, I have been known to make this kind of error.
But now that you mention it, I wonder if my subconscious was making something of an illuminating connection. Like the tired traveler seeking a five-gallon jar of pic
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
So you believe that this spyware was installed on all those devices based on a decision that someone in "middle management" made?
And this one middle manager made this decision for at least three separate companies (Apple, HTC and Samsung)?
I had no idea that Apple, HTC and Samsung had all hired the same middle manager. I've heard of people with three jobs, but this must be one hard-working middle manager.
Re: (Score:3)
And this one middle manager made this decision for at least three separate companies (Apple, HTC and Samsung)?
You missunderstand business at large. Every company has middle managers which a certain amount of decision making and purchasing power. CarrierIQ came up with the idea, let us not mistake that. They then send their marketing goons to various companies, take the middle managers on various funded dinners, and the rest is history. The fact is that middle managers are plentiful and are introduced to a product that has potential to allow them to make a better product in the future.
I probably have one of these m
Re: (Score:3)
It's to your credit that you didn't kill him and take his stuff.
It would have run through my mind.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is in itemised $$$. The base equipment he had is worth about $300k (or rather actually worth around $30k given how digital has turned radio from all hardware to mostly software). The radios are $2.5k each and he only brought 2 of them along. We needed 500 of them.
Kind of makes the $300k look like chickenfeed.
But this isn't the first time I have seen massive product displays in a briefcase. A manufacturer of emergency shutdown systems brought in a rather fat pelican case which had a full shutdo
Re: (Score:2)
What are you, the head technician for a super-villain or something? Did you get the sales demo from the shark-with-laser-beam sales rep, too?
No, don't tell me. Because then you'd have to kill me, I know.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same middle manager working at 18 different town halls who recommended methods and what time and date to evict the Occupy protestors.
The people are being treated as the enemy of the state.
Re: (Score:2)
The existence of icarrier is abusive. And, the decision to implement it is abusive on the parts of SENIOR management at each carrier that had it installed.
Middle management? Really? Dude - middle management decides how often the floors should be swept and mopped, how often machines are to be oiled, and which personnel are on call on holiday weekends. Upper management decides what hours the plant will be open, they determine budgets, and other important stuff. Executives - you know, like CEO's decide wh
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
A government agency does not want to hand over information that may link it to abusing its power. I've never heard of such a thing. Maybe Eric Holder is advising them as to handle the situation.
... or your government might not want to hand over information that it is investigating a criminal act by a corporation.
If you filed a FOIA request for Maddof's case while they were building it, they would have denied that one, too, but not because they were abusing their power.
Re: (Score:3)
That was for a particular case. Because of other rules a criminal case can only remain open for so long. I don't see any time limit for this, and it affects a much broader group (all of us).
Re: (Score:2)
Because of other rules a criminal case can only remain open for so long.
It actually depends. Murder cases, due to a lack of statute of limitations, remain open until solved to the police's satisfaction. (Usually, catching the person, and the end of the prosecution. Either successful or not.)
I don't see any time limit for this...
There is a statute of limitations on illegal wiretapping, however each new act of illegal wiretapping would extend the investigative case.
... it affects a much broader group (all of us).
Have you seen any lawyer movie or even a single episode of "Law and Order"? Criminal cases are brought in the form of "The People vs. ___", because the id
Re: (Score:2)
So every single piece of information related to Carrier IQ is tied up in a handful of cases? Surely they could redact info. There's no justifiable reason to outright deny the request.
Re: (Score:2)
So every single piece of information related to Carrier IQ is tied up in a handful of cases? Surely they could redact info. There's no justifiable reason to outright deny the request.
Why would the FBI have any information on CarrierIQ that wasn't tied up in the investigation of a case? And you can't leak any case information to the public, not even redacted. In fact, if you can help it, it's better for your case if the public doesn't even know that you're investigating until you charge someone.
Re: (Score:2)
C'mon, dude. There's naive and there's this. You really don't think the FBI has a backdoor into Carrier IQ?
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Funny)
Good thing we elected Obama to stop this shit.
Oh.....
Re:I'm stunned (Score:5, Insightful)
Good thing we elected Obama to stop this shit.
Note to future voters: look at actions, not words.
Re:I'm stunned (Score:4, Informative)
But when the FBI/CIA/NSA or some other TLA requests details of a carrier's customer, they PAY for it. Were you not here when there were massive discussions about the release of a carrier's price list for law enforcement and the services they offered to them? Law enforcement doesn't have to get a warrant or a subpoena, they just fill out an order form, check the appropriate boxes and send payment. It's not "law." It's commerce.
Re: (Score:3)
they PAY for it
There's a slashdot story about how the feds were having their wiretaps canceled for nonpayment.
Exemptions may apply (Score:5, Interesting)
The rule is: If we don't want you to know, then there's an applicable exemption to the rule.
And we know where you were last Summer...
Re: (Score:2)
And we know where you were last Summer...
But you don't know where I'll be next.
And my name's not Summer.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think something about that last bit is where any interest in the data might come from.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The US government relies on vendors for just about everything.
Including circumventing Constitutional safeguards against unreasonable search and seizure!
Hey! Look! Google and Facebook are a Trojan Horse for the unaccountable Police State!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you realize...
you can live life w/o google and facebook?
You just have to move to a remote mountain town here in the rockies and get real good at farming, ez right?
Sure....
I've read enough to know those little backcountry mountain towns are the power base for the invasive state security apparatus, "I don't care if a few eggs get broken, just so the one or two things we actually care about get overturned or banned." That attitude, on the part of millions of rural Americans paved the way for Iraq.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be because everybody moved to the cities in search of a "better" life. If all of the sane people left the back country, who is left there?
Re: (Score:2)
I try to block all google domains. I avoid google directly and I block their api sites, the 'syndication' sites, etc.
yet, I find that places that have no business even touching google are still sending outbound (via me) requests to google. case in point, I ordered some parts at mouser (chips, transistors, etc) and wouldn't you know, when you order on their site, they call google in some bizarre way. I didn't catch which google site was being hit, but it was while I was doing catalog searches on their sit
Re: (Score:2)
remote mountain towns are used by the CDC as disease test centers.(see if you can remember raccoon city)
That is why I own a private island. I have cannons too. I can keep pirates and zombie hordes at bay.
Re: (Score:3)
Ha! Everyone know the French use private islands to test their nukes!
I live in a rowing boat on a secret lake where I (almost) constantly row around in a criss-cross pattern determined by a quantum random generator.
Re: (Score:2)
That will work until Google buys images obtained from DHS autonomous drones to create Google Mountainview.
Ha! Little did you know Google already has this feature in Google Earth and Google Maps, they highly detailed views which are not only clear to mere centimetres, further, they are updated every five minutes and can be live when they need to be. DHS only has this view, which means FBI and CIA. But they don't want you to know about it, they don't want anyone to ...
Hold on, someone at door..
NO CARRIER
Re: (Score:3)
Go ahead and guess which tool a carrier could use to collect that data.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:4, Informative)
People, there is a path here...
http://androidforums.com/evo-4g-all-things-root/459292-how-do-i-remove-carrier-iq-software.html [androidforums.com]
Rom your phone, walla no more carrier ifucked.
It's little things like this why the art of hacking is not all lost despite the American social media's mass confusion.
Re: (Score:2)
The very gist of my signature.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or people could take personal responsibility and incorporate the knowledge of this spying into the purchase decision or flash their phones
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wise question. Simple answer. 3rd party data collection is cheaper for the carriers.
CEO: These constant warrantless wiretap requests are a pain in the ass. It's only going to get worse.
CTO: There's a app for that, y'know.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Where in the TOS does it say we voluntarily hand the FBI all our records? Allowing the carrier to monitor us is not the same as allowing the federal government to monitor us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
> it spells out clearly that you are being monitored and
> have 0 expectation of privacy
Website privacy policy != TOS, and provide a URL or it didn't happen.
No contract with a carrier voids the constitution.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No contract with a carrier voids the constitution
Your constitution offers you protection from THE GOVERNMENT doing these kind of things. You signed a contract with A PRIVATE PARTY. Your constitution means NOTHING.
For fuck's sake, someone put this into an X-Factor song so you idiots finally get the message.
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is Carrier IQ collecting data from customers without their knowledge? Does the FBI have warrants granting them access to those customers' data? If the answer to the former is yes and the answer to the latter is no, what we have is quite literally a warrantless wiretap. It's just that the wiretapping is being carried out by a different party than the one that's supposed to get a warrant.
Re:Does it really matter ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. It's a legal warrantless wiretap, which is the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
The meat of this entire issue, is that, there is currently no way to get a phone in the US, from a carrier, and opt-out of the data collection process, such that one does not voluntarily leave a trail of everything they do. Being able to opt-out, would require law enforcement to get a judge approved wiretap to collect current and future information, as no log will have existed ( in the being able to opt out scenario ).
I don't have a smart phone. Why? Because my work provides me with one. There is probably no way for me to opt-out of any kind of data collection that the carrier (or my employer) wants to do. In essence, to be employed in any kind of technological, sales, management, or host of other areas, you are essentially required to be tracked at all times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't necessarily have a problem with my employer watching what apps I install, or what sites I browse. Afterall, it is their phone. But theoretically they also have complete access to where I am (though I suppose I could turn off location services).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
carriers already save text message content... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
they have the ability to save URL data also since we are on their network.
Not if you're connecting to the website using SSL, they don't.
Data logging (Score:5, Interesting)
If the FBI is using Carrier IQ data for investigative purposes, doesn't that call into question the earlier claim from security researchers that Carrier IQ isn't logging data [slashdot.org]?
Re: (Score:3)
Classic case of "We're not doing anything wrong, and even if we are, it's not really wrong anyway, and you should let us keep doing these not-wrong things, because, really, they're the right thing to do, because they're not wrong and we're not doing them."
Re:Data logging (Score:5, Informative)
If the FBI is using Carrier IQ data for investigative purposes, doesn't that call into question the earlier claim from security researchers that Carrier IQ isn't logging data [slashdot.org]?
If you read closely, you'll see that Carrier IQ's argument relies heavily on that data never hitting their servers. The fact that their keylogger-capable malware allows the carrier to extract that info, and consequently hand it to the FBI, is "not their fault" [1].
[1] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/08/carrier-iq-interview [daringfireball.net]
Well, the 4th Amendment... (Score:2)
... itself also undoubtedly "could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the 4th Amendment itself also undoubtedly "could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."
Don't give them any ideas.
Stallman Was Right (Score:5, Insightful)
"It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel. Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that." - The Right to Read [gnu.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The FCC has came out and said rooting an iPhone is legal.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/
I take them a more authoritative on the matter then a random slashdot poster.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Plenty of folks with Xboxes have already been arrested for doing just that!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you didn't get a public defender in some states unless you can show you don't have any money-- if you have money you have to spend it; if you are broke enough then you get a public defender. Or maybe that was another country I was reading about...
Re: (Score:3)
Stallman is an Idiot.
You can call him a prophet when I get arrested for running the OS of my choice.
Don't you think it will be too late then?
Congratulations (Score:2)
Congratulations on making your request. Welcome to The List.
Re: (Score:2)
It's about to get worse! (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA [aclu.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The Senate passed it 92 to 7. I'm pretty sure that's more than a 2/3 majority.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What about subsection (e)? (Score:2)
The new National Defense Authorization Act contains an amendment allowing the military the authority to detain American citizens, on American soil, indefinitely and without access to an attorney.
What about subsection (e)? Wouldn't that argue against that interpretation?
Re: (Score:2)
What about subsection (e)? Wouldn't that argue against that interpretation?
I had a lawyer who specializes in civil rights tell me no, it has big holes in it. Also, Diane Feinstein's filed an amendment to counter it - perhaps for reason (it was soundly defeated and that's all the amendment did).
Re: (Score:2)
I had a lawyer who specializes in civil rights tell me no, it has big holes in it.
That doesn't surprise me.
Thanks for the info, most people I've asked that question to haven't even read the bill.
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (Score:5, Interesting)
"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism.
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
--Pravin Lal
Re:Apple Logo (Score:4, Informative)
Google didn't put it in Android but a number of Android OEMs ARE using CarrierIQ, mostly at the behest of carriers like AT&T who said "include CarrierIQ or we wont sell your new phone"
Re: (Score:2)
Well, to be fair, most of them do have more than 7 days of food in their homes [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't. MK has just been an ass to so many people, on so many occasions, that slashdot itself assumes he is only capable of spewing forth bile -- and so it mods him accordingly.
On the other hand you can turn this off in your preferences - if you register.
tort reform (Score:2)
Tort reform means that a class action may not do much harm to their business if they can make enough cash before losing such a case.