AP: FBI using low-flying spy planes over U.S to spy on us

[mikeyp]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-fbi-using-low-flying-spy-planes-over-us/

WASHINGTON -- The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the country carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology - all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned.

The planes' surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge's approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.

Not that that's illegal or anything...

 

[kalash]

It's like a mobile telescreen.

 

[Len-2A Training]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-fbi-using-low-flying-spy-planes-over-us/

Not that that's illegal or anything...[/FONT][/COLOR]

Not like you should have any expectation of privacy anyway!

 

[Supermoto]

The FBI uses planes for surveillance, shocking

 

[mikeyp]

The FBI uses planes for surveillance, shocking

Them using basically mobile cell towers to listen to phones is a bit shocking

 

[Mr. Gold]

You should have posted it without the linky, using all CAPS, waited for the "Oh you tinfoilers, enough" crap, from the shipple grazing around here, and then provided AP link.

 

[CTpatriot]

its probably to listen to non phone conversations. the cell calls are likely tapped into directly.

 

[BenDover]

"The FBI's aviation program is not secret," spokesman Christopher Allen said in a statement. "Specific aircraft and their capabilities are protected for operational security purposes." Allen added that the FBI's planes "are not equipped, designed or used for bulk collection activities or mass surveillance."

The FBI asked the AP not to disclose the names of the fake companies it uncovered, saying that would saddle taxpayers with the expense of creating new cover companies to shield the government's involvement, and could endanger the planes and integrity of the surveillance missions.

Its not secret, but you will waste taxpayer money to make new fake companies if the AP publishes names?

 

[Cabinetman]

At least we can see and hear the planes. Wait until they get some really good drone/quad technology out there.

Rome

 

[Supermoto]

Them using basically mobile cell towers to listen to phones is a bit shocking

If done without a warrant, then yes. But I suspect this is mostly IMSI collection to track the subject during surveillance, then man in the middle attack when they make a call. Once again if done with a warrant, then no different then a standard wire tap. If done without a warrant, then they should be prosecuted for it.

 

[mikeyp]

You're right, I'm sure they'd never misuse these tools.

 

[Tyke]

If done without a warrant, then yes. But I suspect this is mostly IMSI collection to track the subject during surveillance, then man in the middle attack when they make a call. Once again if done with a warrant, then no different then a standard wire tap. If done without a warrant, then they should be prosecuted for it.

If I recall these IMSI catchers don't discriminate... making it unlike a standard wiretap.

 

[Supermoto]

If I recall these IMSI catchers don't discriminate...

They don't, but do you feel you have the right to privacy on that information when you are broadcasting it out to everyone in a 2 mile radius. I don't think you do. I think anything beyond that should/does require a warrant

 

[Tyke]

They don't, but do you feel you have the right to privacy on that information when you are broadcasting it out to everyone in a 2 mile radius. I don't think you do. I think anything beyond that does require a warrant

You just stated in your previous post you feel a warrant is needed but now say it isn't. Which is it?

 

[Supermoto]

You just stated in your previous post you feel a warrant is needed but now say it isn't. Which is it?

you are not understanding the difference between collecting IMSI numbers and listening to phone calls

 

[Tyke]

you are not understanding the difference between collecting IMSI numbers and listening to phone calls

Are the phone calls intercepted and then sorted through to get the correct call (I.e. the one the warrant for which the warrant was issued)?

 

[rivet_42]

A couple of years back, there was a low-flying plane circling over Quincy 24 hours a day. People were worried about who was behind it and what its purpose was. The engine noise kept some people awake at night. It even made the news and some local politicians tried to investigate with the FBI, FAA, and other agencies to find out what was going on, with no luck.

The FBI admitted later that they were surveilling Khairullozhon Matanov, a friend of the Tsarnaevs, who later pleaded guilty to something like "obstruction of justice" for lying to the FBI.

 

[Supermoto]

Are the phone calls intercepted and then sorted through to get the correct call (I.e. the one the warrant for which the warrant was issued)?

They can be when a man in the middle attack is used, but that is not required to gain IMSI #s

 

[spcantwell]

Its not secret, but you will waste taxpayer money to make new fake companies if the AP publishes names?

The only proper responce from a REAL reporter would have been "go ahead" I am sure we will be able to expose those companies as well since it is still illegal...

BTW, since when did the Federal police start being able to LEGALLY have 'black programs' and 'shell companies' to hide from the general public? I thought ALL police are only allowed to be 'undercover' from certin people in certin situations?

 

[Supermoto]

The only proper responce from a REAL reporter would have been "go ahead" I am sure we will be able to expose those companies as well since it is still illegal...

How is it illegal to use a fake companies name?

 

[Boris]

How is it illegal to use a fake companies name?

Because we are paying for this thinly vailed( ineffective) bullshit?

Creating fake identities, providing false information with intent to deceive isn't legal for mere mortal but ok for .gov because they are better than us, right.

 

[the_shootist]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-fbi-using-low-flying-spy-planes-over-us/



Not that that's illegal or anything...[/FONT][/COLOR]

Hello, I'm from the government and I'm here to protect your safety!!!

 

[pastera]

They don't, but do you feel you have the right to privacy on that information when you are broadcasting it out to everyone in a 2 mile radius. I don't think you do. I think anything beyond that should/does require a warrant

Yes, because it is encrypted for access control and they are circumventing that protection system illegally (see DMCA). If you do the exact same thing, you will end up in the slammer for a while.

 

[Supermoto]

Yes, because it is encrypted for access control and they are circumventing that protection system illegally (see DMCA). If you do the exact same thing, you will end up in the slammer for a while.

Is the IMSI or TSMI encrypted? I don't believe it is. Once the Tower determines that it is an authentic number, then the tower sends out the encryption to make the hand shake with the phone, then at this point the connection is encrypted. IMSI/TSMI It is just a number that still would require access to the carrier's database to determine who it belongs to, although you could mine the data to see where it is consistently located.

If the FBI is breaking encryption without a warrant, then it is wrong and it needs to be stopped.

 

[spcantwell]

Is the IMSI or TSMI encrypted? I don't believe it is. Once the Tower determines that it is an authentic number, then the tower sends out the encryption to make the hand shake with the phone, then at this point the connection is encrypted. IMSI/TSMI It is just a number that still would require access to the carrier's database to determine who it belongs to, although you could mine the data to see where it is consistently located.

If the FBI is breaking encryption without a warrant, then it is wrong and it needs to be stopped.

No, if the fbi is even listening (or recording) ANYTHING with out a warrant then it is illegal and everyone responsible needs to be brought up on charges and arrested. That is the whole point of making them get warrants in the first place. To keep them from blanket wire taps...

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

 

[Supermoto]

No, if the fbi is even listening (or recording) ANYTHING with out a warrant then it is illegal and everyone responsible needs to be brought up on charges and arrested. That is the whole point of making them get warrants in the first place. To keep them from blanket wire taps...

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

So if the FBI or police want to record you yelling your name from the top of your roof top for everyone to hear, they need a warrant? Because that is what your phone is constantly doing with the IMSI and TSMI. spcantwell is here, spcantwell is here is what your phone indiscriminately broadcasts all day.

What I have been saying is that if that info is not encrypted, then you have no expectation of privacy. Once you dial/answer/connect your phone, that is private and should/better require a warrant

 

[Tyke]

So if the FBI or police want to record you yelling your name from the top of your roof top for everyone to hear, they need a warrant? Because that is what your phone is constantly doing with the IMSI and TSMI.

That argument may be countered by SCOTUS opinion in Kyllo v US. Even though the heat was radiated out ("broadcasted", or "shouted from the roof top" [literally]), law enforcement erred by not getting a warrant.

 

[deerdad]

Mosin...when you need to reach up and touch someone.

Greg

 

[jkelly1229]

They don't, but do you feel you have the right to privacy on that information when you are broadcasting it out to everyone in a 2 mile radius. I don't think you do. I think anything beyond that should/does require a warrant

Your not broadcasting your using a specific piece of equipment set to a specific frequency which operates within an allotted range set to the company by the faa. Intercepting that communication is very very no Bueno for you to do its considered an act of terrorism in major metropolitan areas because you can ef with plane transmissions. So no you aren't publicly broadcasting that over 2 miles. Essentially just think of it as cable but instead of the wire you just don't have one. Imsi can be used to track a phone intercept calls texts Web searches not just calls. They can gather how ever many steps your little fit bit tracks if your app pushes your consumer data to the company. Essentially anything you do on the phone connected to the interwebs can be track by one of those devices.

And of course the govt won't abuse that power just ask all those nsa nerds who sifted thru millions of snap chats and commented on all the hot chick's to each other they totally got fired.... o wait

 

[Supermoto]

That argument may be countered by SCOTUS opinion in Kyllo v US. Even though the heat was radiated out ("broadcasted", or "shouted from the roof top" [literally]), law enforcement erred by not getting a warrant.

Definitely an interesting point, but would the ISMI/TSMI # be unknowable without a physical intrusion into a home if the technology did not exist. what if you are walking down the street does that now make a difference assuming the # is available, in your phone (warrant to get) at the carrier (hopefully they don't give it out without a warrant) and in the air, (so for no warrant)

Your not broadcasting your using a specific piece of equipment set to a specific frequency which operates within an allotted range set to the company by the faa. Intercepting that communication is very very no Bueno for you to do its considered an act of terrorism in major metropolitan areas because you can ef with plane transmissions. So no you aren't publicly broadcasting that over 2 miles. Essentially just think of it as cable but instead of the wire you just don't have one. Imsi can be used to track a phone intercept calls texts Web searches not just calls. They can gather how ever many steps your little fit bit tracks if your app pushes your consumer data to the company. Essentially anything you do on the phone connected to the interwebs can be track by one of those devices.

And of course the govt won't abuse that power just ask all those nsa nerds who sifted thru millions of snap chats and commented on all the hot chick's to each other they totally got fired.... o wait

I see the ISMI/TSMI # as something similar to a license plate or i.p. address , its a ID number and with it you can get more info, but in of its self, it is just a number.,