Re: [ietf-privacy] Fwd: [Internet Policy] How a Radio Shack Robbery Could Spur a New Era in Digital Privacy

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>Interesting article, cross-posted from ISOC Public Policy list

Carpenter is an interesting case, but it has nothing to do with the
Internet.

It's quite fact specific to mobile phones, which by their nature
transmit a running history of their location to the towers which
mobile phone companies log.  This was true even in AMPS days, at least
the tower data part if not the logging.

The question presented is whether the cops need a warrant from a judge
to get access to those logs or just a subpoena from law enforcement or
from a lawyer.  The argument on one side is that it's a great deal of
rather personal information, e.g., it told them whether Carpenter went
to church each Sunday and when he spent the night at someone's house
other than his own.  The argument on the other is that it's the same
info they'd get if they had a cop tail the guy.  (You don't have to
tell me that those arguments are not equally persuasive, but that's
what they are.)

Lots of details here:

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/carpenter-v-united-states-2

Here's the usually reasonable Orin Kerr making the just like a tail argument:

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/08/symposium-carpenter-eyewitness-rule/

R's,
John