Cops To Congress: We Need Logs of Americans' Text Messages

Dainsanefh tips a CNET report about a number of law enforcement groups who have put forth a proposal to the U.S. Senate to require wireless providers to keep logs of subscriber text messages for a minimum of two years. "As the popularity of text messages has exploded in recent years, so has their use in criminal investigations and civil lawsuits. They have been introduced as evidence in armed robbery, cocaine distribution, and wire fraud prosecutions. In one 2009 case in Michigan, wireless provider SkyTel turned over the contents of 626,638 SMS messages, a figure described by a federal judge as 'staggering.' Chuck DeWitt, a spokesman for the Major Cities Chiefs Police Association, which represents the 63 largest U.S. police forces including New York City, Los Angeles, Miami, and Chicago, said 'all such records should be retained for two years.' Some providers, like Verizon, retain the contents of SMS messages for a brief period of time, while others like T-Mobile do not store them at all. Along with the police association, other law enforcement groups making the request to the Senate include the National District Attorneys' Association, the National Sheriffs' Association, and the Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies, DeWitt said."

Re:Catch 22:

[logjon]

Why encrypt data if you do to care if the government knows it? Because it's none of their fucking business. Or you actually believe that the FBI could not know everything about you if they wanted to? If they want to waste their time, they can go right ahead. I'm not going to help them, though. Let them bore the fuck out of themselves. Encryption does no good if you control the sender/receiver, or built a back-door into the encryptor/phone to begin with. No shit.

Re:Know what would really make sense?

[Attila Dimedici]

And that would be a bad thing? If your number (50%) is correct, I believe we would be living in a safer world.

Re:The People to Cops....

[Anonymous Coward]

How about, "Sure thing, but you need a warrant to access them"?

I learned five years ago that it is so easy for a cop to obtain a search warrant. I used to own a red Mustang at that time and they mistook my car with a drug dealer's one. Apparently, that was enough proof for them to obtain a Federal Warrant to break into my house while I was taking a shower. They did a thorough search of the property and damage was done to my house that was never reimbursed.

At one point they also threatened to shoot my 8 year old dog (At that time) because she wouldn't stop barking. All they took was my address book and it was returned a year or so later. I talked to lawyers and no one wanted to touch the case since they had a "Federal" warrant. They all told me that it would be way cheaper for me just to repair the damage than to sue them.

Re:Catch 22:

[Kittenman]

I was investigated repeatedly by the NSA and they couldn't produce more than half a sheet of paper about me. They got a 20 page thick tome when they were done, made up entirely of things I admitted to under polygraph, and denied my clearance. 80% of my life was unaccountable to them. It frightened the shit out of them.

The NSA are using a polygraph? A lie-detector? Why didn't they just use a horoscope or tea-leaf reading, or something equally reliable?

Re:Catch 22:

[pixelpusher220]

Currently, the FBI really only sticks its nose into people that have done something 'big.'

You're serious? You haven't seen the dozens [techdirt.com] of cases [techdirt.com] where the FBI manufactured [techdirt.com] a bomb [endthelie.com] plot [thisamericanlife.org] from some moron who chimed in on a 'shady' website that he wanted to bomb the US?