this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
355 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59190 readers
3713 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] solrize@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

That set it up so that the material handed over was in Verizon's possession (business records) and Verizon gave permission. The law is written so that they need a warrant for an actual wiretap (call contents) but not the metadata. Of course metadata is all you need to stalk the person, so that should need a warrant too.

It's fairly easy to avoid giving your cellular carrier your address (get the bills sent to a PO box} or even your name (buy a prepaid phone with cash). But it's harder to keep your call records or geolocation info away from them. :(

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

It was my understanding that warrants were needed to force the acquisition of information, regardless of the type of information. Even call contents are allowed to be freely given to the police as long as you have legitimate access to it.

So Verizon has the ability to say “no” to the metadata too.

They just choose not to.

They choose to sell it rather than force the police to get a warrant. Perhaps they give it for free, I don’t know, but either way, they’re not forced to without a warrant.