FBI has 12 MILLION iPhone user's data - Unique Device IDentifiers, Address, Full Name, APNS tokens, phone numbers.. you are being tracked.

[luke viia]

I don't have a facebook account. Actually deleted the bastard instead of just deactivating. The difference between an organization like google or Apple having my info, and the government collecting data (either from those sources or on their own) is this: the organizations I give my data to do not have the same power over me as the government does. The data is more powerful in the hands of the feds, and since we don't know how they're using it, I don't feel too comfortable about the whole thing.

 

And yeah the government does know a lot about me already, like my tax info. That's a bit different than copies of text messages to my friends and family, though. I realize this "leak" isn't about sending messages like that, but the articles about that NSA base in the desert suggest that the feds aren't really against greatly extending their data-tapping, and knowing that Apple has handed over millions of phone IDs to the FBI is just disconcerting, that's all. It's nothing new, this thread is just reason to keep on vocalizing anxieties over our changing "privacy"

[sweepstakes]

I don't have a facebook account. Actually deleted the cocksucker instead of just deactivating.

Fixed.

 

Smokes, let's go.

[goDel]

I don't have a facebook account. Actually deleted the bastard instead of just deactivating. The difference between an organization like google or Apple having my info, and the government collecting data (either from those sources or on their own) is this: the organizations I give my data to do not have the same power over me as the government does. The data is more powerful in the hands of the feds, and since we don't know how they're using it, I don't feel too comfortable about the whole thing.

 

And yeah the government does know a lot about me already, like my tax info. That's a bit different than copies of text messages to my friends and family, though. I realize this "leak" isn't about sending messages like that, but the articles about that NSA base in the desert suggest that the feds aren't really against data-tapping, and knowing that Apple has handed over millions of phone IDs to the FBI is just disconcerting, that's all. It's nothing new, this thread is just reason to keep on vocalizing anxieties over our changing "privacy"

 

Well, whatever the government may or may not have about you, there's always a set of laws they have to comply to. This opens the discussion to the patriotic act, of course (or what it was called). But in general, the government is pretty predictable with what it would or can do with the information they have.

 

@Wall Bird: thanks for the link. Pretty interesting article/interview!

[luke viia]

Fair enough, I just don't trust the government to stay predictable, and the data isn't ever going to go away, even though the laws might change pretty drastically. I do see what you're saying though. I think we just have different perspectives on what to expect in the future... and maybe your habits are a bit more on the status quo side than mine, I don't know, but I just really don't like the idea of feeling watched every time I want to google something. I like googling illegal things.

 

On the flip side, this should give me the incentive I need to go full tinfoil, and I've always sorta wanted to be a survivalist nutbar, like our friend Randy. Maybe it's for the best.

[goDel]

If you haven't watched the clip Wall Bird linked to, you might want to check it out. Lots of issues are being spoken about. And on top of that, what could be the benefits of "Big Data"? What about regulation? Etc, etc.

 

And yes, I'm pretty numb to the paranoid feeling of being watched. That might be because I have access to medical data of millions of people and I understand what sort of information could be extracted from that. Plus, I don't live in a world where the government has (inherent) bad intentions. That might be naive. It might also be realistic. Think about it.

[luke viia]

For sure, I do spend a lot of time thinking about the difficulties faced by government officials and how I would never want to be in such a difficult moral position as a career. I try my best to remain realistic about the government and about the reality of the troubles people face today (was being facetious when suggesting I should take after Randy), and to avoid making up easily digested "us vs them" stories to justify the weirdness I see and read about.

 

Nonetheless, I don't like the way the government has been acting over the last few years with regards to privacy and their ideas of making the internet "safer." I'll check out that link Wall Bird dropped - edge.org is a great site.

 

Have you read that wired article about the NSA's new desert facility?

[goDel]

Nope, not yet. But will do.

 

Nonetheless, I don't like the way the government has been acting over the last few years with regards to privacy and their ideas of making the internet "safer."

 

Have any specific actions in mind? Well, besides collecting data, like suggested by the thread starter.

 

And "their ideas of making the internet safer"? There might be people in government having ideas which you and I would disagree with, but the government is not some big monster with a mind of its own. Even if there have been laws approved which we could label as bad, odds are there are plenty people in the government agreeing with us. Laws aren't perfect and always open to improvement. That's why there's politics. And that's why people should vote.

[luke viia]

Yes, I'm simplifying quite a bit. You're right, when I say something like "the government has X plans," I'm being a bit of a dolt and actually mean to say "Congress will likely pass legislation X that will cause Y to happen in the future," or something along those lines. It's easier to simplify in threads like this. I am definitely sympathetic to the idea that there are certain people in government I disagree with, it's not "THE GOVERNMENT: EVIL INC" or something. There are just very few people in office that I do agree with, lol. That's probably my fault, I'm not very compromising with my political ideas and am still an Angry Young Man to some degree.

 

Re: specific internet-related actions/privacy restrictions set by the government that I don't like: DMCA, CISPA, Patriot Act. That kind of thing. Laws that people try to stop, then new variants are introduced and passed anyway. Voting is important, as are our representatives, but when you stop a bill and it just keeps coming back year after year, I don't think the voters voices are really being heard. Getting pretty far off the subject now though.

[goDel]

After having had a waterboarding president, it's not that strange of an idea. But even things like that don't make the government completely untrustworthy (although it does help). There's been plenty politicians agreeing with us. And as far as I can tell, not one person has been put into jail for calling Bush Jr. an idiot. If that were the case, half the US population would have been in jail.

 

Anyways, back to topic.

 

I have an iPhone and the FBI sucks!

[SR4]

If you haven't watched the clip Wall Bird linked to, you might want to check it out. Lots of issues are being spoken about. And on top of that, what could be the benefits of "Big Data"? What about regulation? Etc, etc.

 

And yes, I'm pretty numb to the paranoid feeling of being watched. That might be because I have access to medical data of millions of people and I understand what sort of information could be extracted from that. Plus, I don't live in a world where the government has (inherent) bad intentions. That might be naive. It might also be realistic. Think about it.

 

Government by default definition has no inherent bad intentions. Government is a tool, not an actor. For government to be "bad" it must first be used by individuals/groups with bad intentions.

[luke viia]

Greatly enjoyed the edge.org link, Alex Pentland has some real interesting stuff to say!

[oscillik]

and people are still forgetting that there is no proof that there is a file with 12 million Apple UDIDs collated by the FBI

[SR4]

and people are still forgetting that there is no proof that there is a file with 12 million Apple UDIDs collated by the FBI

 

and you are forgetting that the topic has changed quite a bit from the original premise.

[goDel]

and people are still forgetting that there is no proof that there is a file with 12 million Apple UDIDs collated by the FBI

 

people?

 

ima robot!

[oscillik]

and people are still forgetting that there is no proof that there is a file with 12 million Apple UDIDs collated by the FBI

 

and you are forgetting that the topic has changed quite a bit from the original premise.

 

not when said UDIDs are still being referenced, it hasn't.

[luke viia]

You're right, no one has addressed that complaint yet. No one has been hinging their argument on the number 12 million either though

[oscillik]

You're right, no one has addressed that complaint yet. No one has been hinging their argument on the number 12 million either though

 

there's also no proof that the currently released 1 million and 1 UDIDs were sourced from an FBI computer.

 

just someone's 'word'.

[luke viia]

Right, you have a valid point, and that is why I and others have moved the discussion to the broader world of information privacy. More interesting than a hang-up about anon. It's no secret that governments collect civilian data, so the iPhone case isn't really necessary for the rest of the conversation to carry on.

[goDel]

but is there proof that there isn't any ^proof?

[oscillik]

Right, you have a valid point, and that is why I and others have moved the discussion to the broader world of information privacy. More interesting than a hang-up about anon. It's no secret that governments collect civilian data, so the iPhone case isn't really necessary for the rest of the conversation to carry on.

 

As for the broader discussion, someone has already pointed out the obvious.

 

I work for a major mobile phone company in the UK, and I have the ability to pick out a subscriber on the network, find out what telephone number texted them and at what time. And that's just what a 'grunt' like me has access to.

 

Anyone that thinks that their cellular provider doesn't have the ability to find out the content of their text messages is clearly deluded.

 

Also, anyone that doesn't think that their local government has access to this data, you're again deluded.

 

Unless you're using Tor and various other methods of identity obfuscation (both virtual and real life), then you cannot escape being 'tracked', so to speak.

 

Is it right? no.

 

it's up to you personally whether you want to take action against these measures, but you're very deeply rooted in tin-foil hate territory once you start considering setting up nodes and shit just to check watmm

 

[luke viia]

As an employee, can you read people's text messages? Do you know if anyone in your company has access to that info, and under what kind of circumstance they might be able to "need" access to it? That's the kind of privacy I'm interested in... of course you can see what numbers called someone and when - that's helpful info and something you clearly sign over your "right" to when you get a phone contract.

 

TBH the Apple part of this thread is not that interesting, 12 million users or not. That info is not very interesting, although I won't say I understand the extent to which Apple's push notifications describe the user's activities. It could be completely harmless or somewhat sensitive - do you know anything about APNs? (did I even ask that right?)

 

It's "big data" + terrorism that is scary to me in the US.

[oscillik]

As an employee, can you read people's text messages? Do you know if anyone in your company has access to that info, and under what kind of circumstance they might be able to "need" access to it?

 

I don't have privileges to view content of text messages, but we (first line customer support) used to have that access. And those higher up than me certainly have access to this system.

 

do you know anything about APNs? (did I even ask that right?)

 

an APN is basically like a gateway.

 

you point your phone to your provider's APN and that APN gives you an IP address, and serves you internet traffic. Some providers have all traffic go through a proxy, which was the cause of some consternation recently and is something that other networks have done too (linked article in my post shows research by Collin Mulliner

[syd syside]

I think people need to be a bit more realistic about privacy and realize none of us are right in the center of things. America has some of if not the best freedom of speech laws, I have seen no evidence that the Patriot Act is being used to target people for things outside of serious criminal activity... that's not to say that its justified, because it isn't and I think the focus on why it isn't justified shouldn't be played way out in the land of "the government is watching or plans on monitoring everyone." The fact that they can abuse the law on some individuals is wrong, even when those individuals are guilty of some kind of violent act/plan. Our intelligence agencies could have grabbed two of the 9/11 hijackers but didn't because of incompetence... but even then we must approach Government defense/safety as not a perfect entity and violence as an ever present force/symptom of societal issues.

[SR4]

I have seen no evidence that the Patriot Act is being used to target people for things outside of serious criminal activity...

 

lemme help you out with that

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_the_USA_PATRIOT_Act

[syd syside]

Right... if that's as controversial as it gets than I think my point stands. Seems like in at least half of these cases the courts later threw out the evidence because of an abuse of the Patriot Act itself. But keep on living in fear friend.