[Peace-discuss] Fwd: mobile phones

[Al Kagan]

Those of you who use cell phones should have a look at this.

>Delivered-To: akagan at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu
>Date:  2 Dec 2001 08:23:03 GMT
>From: Martyn Lowe <martynlowe at usa.net>
>To: Mark Rosenzweig <iskra at earthlink.net>, <akagan at uiuc.edu>,
>	<eharger at tao.agoron.com>, <fstoss at acsu.buffalo.edu>,
>	<jgrant at bookzen.com>, <lib-plic-owner at yahoogroups.com>,
>	<lou_zbigou at hotmail.com>, <rory at libr.org>
>Subject: Fwd:  mobile phones
>Cc: Laura Held <lauraheld at t-online.de>, Martin Rasmussen <mart at c.dk>
>Status:  
>
>FYI
>
>You might like to note this, as it illustrates aspects of how civil liberty
>issues change with the use of new technologies.
>
>Martyn
>
>Received: from cpdvg001 [127.0.0.1] by cpdvg202 via mtad (34FM.0700.19.01A)
>	with ESMTP id 021FLaR3o0637M07; Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:54:15 GMT
>Received: from che.cupboard.org [212.67.201.221] by cpdvg001 via 
>mtad (34FM.0700.19.01A);
>	Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:54:23 GMT
>Received: (qmail 6364 invoked by uid 509); 1 Dec 2001 17:54:06 -0000
>Mailing-List: contact lgp-int-help at mclibel.org; run by ezmlm
>Delivered-To: mailing list lgp-int at mclibel.org
>Received: (qmail 6359 invoked by uid 506); 1 Dec 2001 17:54:06 -0000
>X-Sender: helen at mail.globalnet.co.uk
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>To: lgp-int <lgp-int at mclibel.org>
>From: helen at globalnet.co.uk
>Message-Id: <E16AELO-0004HH-00 at cobalt3-he.global.net.uk>
>Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:54:30 +0000
>Subject: [lgp-int] mobile phones
>
>For anyone who missed it and might be interested
>
>
>You can ring, but you can't hide
>Our mobile phones track every move we make, but we're entitled to see their
>logs.  S A Mathieson  went on a lengthy search for his
>S A Mathieson
>Wednesday November 28 2001
>The Guardian
>
>
>  Tracked: the call record
>     More than half the population of this country carries a tracking device.
>Its records can be accessed by police officers, intelligence authorities,
>customs officials and Inland Revenue inspectors. Crimes, unpaid taxes or
>government dues can be investigated using this information. The data is held
>for several months: in some cases, for several years.
>
>We carry these devices voluntarily. They are called mobile phones. 
>
>Last March, the mobile network Orange said it kept location information for
>six months and passed it on when obliged to by law, but wouldn't discuss
>details. 
>
>Online can now reveal that the base station used by an Orange subscriber is
>retained at the beginning and end of every call, whether outbound or
>inbound, including calls to retrieve voicemail. 
>
>The system also records the base station used by the other person, if they
>are part of the Orange network. A call to its answering service produces a
>destination code of 65535. 
>
>This information was obtained under the Data Protection Act, which gives
>individuals rights to see data held on them. Orange staff repeatedly denied
>the existence of location data, then said it wasn't covered by   the Act. It
>took two months of inquiries, and countless telephone calls and letters,
>before the firm produced the document pictured opposite. 
>
>Approached for comment this week, the company said it trains its staff in
>data protection and privacy, and "is continually looking at ways of adapting
>its customer service in order to meet the fresh challenges brought about by
>new legislation and regulation". But the firm refuses to provide the
>location of the base stations numbered in the document, saying this is not
>held against personal records and is "commercially sensitive". 
>
>This is despite the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, which says:
>"An individual is entitled_ to have communicated to him in an intelligible
>form_ the information constituting any personal data of which that
>individual is the data subject." It adds that when data "expressed in terms
>which are not intelligible without explanation the copy must be accompanied
>by an explanation of those terms". 
>
>The situation is now under consideration by the Office of the Information
>Commissioner, which polices data protection law. 
>
>Each of the four UK mobile phone networks, Vodafone, Orange, BT Cellnet and
>One2One (also used by Virgin Mobile), controls several thousand base
>stations - BT Cellnet has more than 6,600 - through which subscribers' calls
>are connected. 
>
>When a phone is switched on, and every few minutes when working, it sends
>out a signal, which you can hear on nearby sound equipment as a sequence of
>interference. All base stations of that network within range respond, and
>the firm allocates the phone to one station. 
>
>BT Cellnet will, for legal purposes, state that a call using one of its base
>stations was made from a phone within 35 kilometres of that station. John
>Fletcher, a senior consultant for the telecoms consultancy Analysys, says
>35km is the "practical maximum" range for base stations used by a GSM 900
>network, the kind operated by Cellnet and Vodafone. Orange and One2One
>operate GSM 1800 networks, which use base stations within half this range. 
>
>In practice, the base station is likely to be far closer. This can be
>because of hills shortening its range, but is usually because towns and
>cities have large numbers of stations to cater for the greater demand. 
>
>"You may find that the cell radius is collapsed to 500 or 600 metres," says
>Fletcher.   "Then there are picocells, 50 metres in radius, for office
>blocks or shopping centres." He adds that networks plan urban coverage for
>different kinds of users, so an urban motorway might feature a base station
>positioned to cover a long stretch of road, with other smaller cells
>positioned for pedestrians. 
>
>So the base station provides a fairly accurate idea of a user's position,
>especially within cities. As a precise locator it is fallible, as a network
>may not allocate a phone to the nearest station, particularly if congested. 
>
>However, the Orange data showed consistency for calls made from this
>reporter's home in central Bath: all went through base stations 39307 and
>39308. 
>
>It also shows how cells can change within a few hundred yards. Two calls
>made on separate days from Bath Spa railway station, less than half a mile
>to the south, used base station 20428. 
>
>Even without the location of the base stations, a user could employ this
>data to prove his approximate location, if he had previously been witnessed
>connecting through the base station cited. 
>
>Law enforcement authorities can obtain both the data and the location of the
>numbered base stations. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act of
>last year, such an application has to pass a test of "necessity". "It is an
>invasion of someone's privacy, so proportionality is the key," says a home
>office spokesperson. 
>
>But the reasons for application are wide: from national security, to crime,
>preventing   disorder, public health and safety, emergency protection of an
>individual's physical or mental health, through to assessing or collecting
>any tax or other charge due to a government department. Law enforcement
>authorities contacted by Online refused to discuss how applications work. 
>
>Although the anti-terrorism bill which was rushed through parliament isn't
>going to change the conditions for access, it is set to allow communication
>providers to retain this data for longer. The provisional figure is a year
>(see www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,593343,00.html and the home
>secretary can make retention compulsory through secondary legislation. 
>
>This may affect Orange, which currently retains location data for six
>months. Vodafone already keeps it for a year, BT Cellnet for "at least a
>year", and Virgin Mobile has retained it since its foundation in November
>1999. It plans to hold such data for six years, citing financial
>regulations. One2One refused to disclose its retention period. Other than
>this information, none of the networks would discuss location data further
>than to say they complied with the law. 
>
>Location data can be useful in fighting crime. There have already been a
>number of high-profile cases where mobile phone records have been sought by
>police. However, savvy criminals are increasingly buying unregistered
>prepaid mobiles, or stealing other people's, in order to escape the tracking
>abilities of their mobile   phones. And there's a wider point. "The
>fundamental question is whether, in a democratic society, it is necessary to
>track everyone's movements and store them for long periods of time, to
>prevent and detect crime," says Caspar Bowden, director of the think-tank
>the Foundation for Information Policy Research. 
>
>"The police have no compunction about lobbying for these retention powers in
>secret, but there should be a wider debate about basic values needed to
>preserve liberty," he says, adding that judicially authorised retention of
>data on named individuals would be preferable. 
>
>Location data is getting more accurate. BT Cellnet already offers traffic
>news based on which base station the caller uses, and the potential for such
>services would be greatly increased by tighter accuracy. One bright idea is
>that phone users could get text messages from shops as they passed them,
>with special offers enticing them inside. 
>
>More usefully, accurate location data could save lives. A call to the
>emergency services from a mobile cannot be traced accurately, unlike one
>from a landline: if a mobile caller rings off without giving a location,
>little can usually be done. The US authorities recently told mobile makers
>to include technology to solve this problem. This could also help motorists
>who break down. 
>
>To achieve this, phones could be fitted with GPS (global positioning
>satellite) technology, which can be accurate to within a few feet. However,
>this would increase   the cost of mobiles. 
>
>Or networks could use triangulation, requiring no phone upgrades. This
>long-standing technique uses time-delays and strengths of radio signals
>between a transmitter and at least two base stations to calculate the user's
>position. 
>
>Analysys's John Fletcher   says triangulation would be possible with
>existing network hardware, although it would require new software and
>procedures, and be less accurate and reliable than GPS, although far more
>accurate than the current system. 
>
>"This is under active investigation," he says. "The first   thing would be
>location-based tariffs. Vodafone introduced these in 1992, but withdrew them
>when it realised the phones didn't always use the cell nearest the home
>address." 
>
>Networks charging by location, would presumably retain your exact location
>with your billing information - and if data is retained, the police can see
>it. 
>
>Given everyone from MI5 to the tax man can check out where you have been,
>why are the networks reluctant to release it to you in an intelligible form,
>or even discuss its existence? 
>
>Analysys's John Fletcher thinks this reticence dates from the networks' race
>to establish coverage. "It was advantageous to keep their locations quiet,"
>he says. "Now, I think there are two reasons: physical security of assets
>from vandals or extortionists, and public concern over microwave radiation." 
>
>Rupert Battcock, an IT lawyer at Nabarro Nathanson, adds another: "Telecoms
>providers may fear they will be flooded with requests: maybe that's why they
>are reluctant to do this. 
>
>"But if they have facilities to provide it to someone else, such as the
>police, and it can be shown to qualify as personal data, I'm hard-pressed to
>see how this request could be denied."
>
>Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited

-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu