PRISM

[BigV]

I need to try out my voice more.

[Griff]

[Griff]

The Drug Enforcement Administration has been the recipient of multiple tips from the NSA. DEA officials in a highly secret office called the Special Operations Division are assigned to handle these incoming tips, according to Reuters. Tips from the NSA are added to a DEA database that includes “intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records.” This is problematic because it appears to break down the barrier between foreign counter-terrorism investigations and ordinary domestic criminal investigations.

On and on...

[Lamplighter]

...along that line, here is a story about bank robbers, the FBI, and "tower dumps"

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...hy-it-matters/
Ars Technica
Nate Anderson
8/29/13

How “cell tower dumps” caught the High Country Bandits—and why it matters
Fishing expeditions can pay dividends—but do they need a warrant?

On February 18, 2010, the FBI field office in Denver issued a "wanted" notice
for two men known as "the High Country Bandits"—a rather grandiose name
for a pair of middle-aged white men who had been knocking down rural banks
in northern Arizona and Colorado, grabbing a few thousand dollars
from a teller's cash drawer and sometimes escaping on a stolen all-terrain vehicle (ATV).
<snip>
If you're the FBI, you ask a judge to approve a full "cell tower dump,"
in which wireless operators will turn over the records of every cell phone
that registered with a particular tower at a particular time.
(Phones "register" with the nearest cell towers so that the network knows how to route calls.)
And then you look for any numbers that stand out.
<snip>
The FBI actually received more than 150,000 registered cell phone numbers
from this particular set of tower dumps, despite picking the most rural locations possible.
What the case agents wanted to do was scan the logs from all four sites on the belief
that no single person was likely to be at all four banks during the robbery—except for the robber.

So the FBI dumped all the numbers into a Microsoft Access database and ran a query.
As expected, only a single number came back: Verizon Wireless phone number 928-205-xxxx
had registered with the tower closest to three of the banks on the day of each robbery.
(Verizon didn't have a cell tower covering the fourth bank.)
Further analysis found a second number, 928-358-xxxx,
that had been in contact with 928-205-xxx and that had registered with two of the towers in question.

The FBI then went back to the judge and obtained more particular
court orders covering these specific phone numbers.
The phone numbers came back with subscriber names attached: Joel Glore and Ronald Capito.
And the location data returned showed that these two phones had
been present at most of the 16 bank robberies under investigation.
Further, the data showed that both phones tended to travel from Show Low, Arizona,
to the location of each bank just before each robbery.
<snip>

BUT... About those 149,998 other numbers...

Bandits? Caught. Justice? Done.
But let's step back from the final result for a moment and ponder
the technique that provided the big lead —the cell tower dumps.
Should we have any concerns with the government getting that sort
of mass tracking information on so many Americans without a warrant?

Some judges say yes. Former Magistrate Judge Brian Owsley dealt routinely
with warrant requests and court orders until becoming a law school professor earlier this year;
he has just written an intriguing paper about the issues surrounding cell tower dumps.
In his view, these are clearly "searches" under the Fourth Amendment,
and they require a full warrant backed by evidence of "probable cause."

That's because the Supreme Court jurisprudence on surveillance has
relied for decades in part on the idea of someone's "reasonable expectation of privacy"
—and people certainly expect that their location won't be easily and routinely accessible
to law enforcement without a warrant, regardless of whether cell phone technology tracks them or not.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Access ??? I don't want anyone having access to this kind of data who does't have a ƒucking SQL Server guy on staff.

[Lamplighter]

Don't worry about it... that was just a product placement ad.

[Lamplighter]

Here is a new program published today ... a program called "HEMISPHERE"
It's not just cell phones... it's every call that goes through an AT&T "switch"

NY Times
SCOTT SHANE and COLIN MOYNIHAN
9/1/13

Drug Agents Use Vast Phone Trove, Eclipsing N.S.A.’s

For at least six years, law enforcement officials working on a counternarcotics program
have had routine access, using subpoenas, to an enormous AT&T database
that contains the records of decades of Americans’ phone calls
— parallel to but covering a far longer time than the National Security Agency’s
hotly disputed collection of phone call logs.<snip>

Hemisphere covers every call that passes through an AT&T switch
— not just those made by AT&T customers —
and includes calls dating back 26 years, according to Hemisphere training slides
bearing the logo of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Some four billion call records are added to the database every day, the slides say;
technical specialists say a single call may generate more than one record.
Unlike the N.S.A. data, the Hemisphere data includes information on the locations of callers.<snip>

Crucially, they said, the phone data is stored by AT&T,
and not by the government as in the N.S.A. program.
It is queried for phone numbers of interest mainly using what are called
“administrative subpoenas,” those issued not by a grand jury or a judge
but by a federal agency, in this case the D.E.A.<snip>

“Is this a massive change in the way the government operates?
No,” said Mr. Richman, who worked as a federal drug prosecutor in Manhattan in the early 1990s.
“Actually you could say that it’s a desperate effort by the government to catch up.”

But Mr. Richman said the program at least touched on an unresolved Fourth Amendment question:
whether mere government possession of huge amounts of private data,
rather than its actual use, may trespass on the amendment’s
requirement that searches be “reasonable.”
Even though the data resides with AT&T, the deep interest and involvement of the government
in its storage may raise constitutional issues, he said.

Here is the article-link to the slides described above...


NY Times
9/1/13

Synopsis of the Hemisphere Project

The government pays AT&T to place its employees in drug-fighting units around the country.
Those employees sit alongside Drug Enforcement Administration agents
and local detectives and supply them with the phone data from as far back as 1987.

A slide presentation given to The New York Times shows that the Hemisphere Project
was started in 2007 and has been carried out in great secrecy.