WHAT YOU AREN'T BEING TOLD ABOUT THE NEW SCOTUS RULING | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED


WHAT YOU AREN'T BEING TOLD ABOUT THE NEW SCOTUS RULING

...MAY HURT YOU.

Recently the Supreme Court ruled that to access to the vast amount of information, logged by your cellphone many times per minute on exactly where you have been and for how long, that the cellphone provider keeps for five years, a warrant is required. Fantastic. Obvious, right?

Well, no, and more importantly, as a privacy "win," understanding the new ruling is counter-intuitive. Reports on the ruling barely mention certain things as they rush to soothe an American public justifiably edgy after all the post Snowden lies. Such as:

    it does NOT apply to real-time location data - so patterns can be reassembled after new tracking
    it does NOT apply to data collected by the private sector - so data can be bought or traded
    it does NOT apply to investigations related to national security - and remember, most invocations of the Patriot Act involved drugs, not terrorism

Private entities regularly share their data with the government, without a warrant, and even if they didn't, a trivial amount of real-time location tracking will reestablish the behavioral patterns of most individuals with alarming accuracy. Enough to discover most if not all of their important social affiliations. Include the call metadata, and you have nearly all of it; track their friends for a week, and, without a warrant, but with the info already available, I am sure the degree to which their privacy has been infringed upon exceeds that with which the Founding fathers felt comfortable.

For more detailed analysis, information, and links to sources, please visit No Warrant, No Problem: New SCOTUS Ruling Does Not Apply To Real Time Location Tracking.

Comments

SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA