Text messages and law enforcement

[Bob Loblaw]

Hushmail with TrueCrypt file attachment = impossible-to-crack method of sending pics of your family fishing trip...

The best and easiest way to communicate is via email, hell even PMs, with GPG and a strong passphrase. Very easy to implement with Firefox via FireGPG and very easy to set up a GPG key. You type your message, make a few mouse clicks, receive a message, enter your passphrase with a few more clicks, and voila, extremely secure communication complete. Now you won't have to worry about LEOs intercepting the family-secret brownie recipe any more!

 

[Missalynn]

http://news.cnet.com/Police-Blotter...hrough-text-messages/2100-1036_3-6231980.html

"This isn't the first time the Police Blotter has covered how telecommunications providers store copies of text messages--and how police have obtained them to use in criminal prosecutions.
An alleged cocaine dealer in the Washington, D.C., area had his SMS text messages used against him, as did a wire fraud defendant last year.

Some of the ground rules remain unsettled, with defense attorneys frequently arguing that privacy laws and the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment suggest that archived text messages should be--legally speaking--difficult to obtain. Police, on the other hand, believe that they should be much easier to obtain."

Guess that answers the question, it's possible.

 

[forgotten]

http://news.cnet.com/Police-Blotter...hrough-text-messages/2100-1036_3-6231980.html

"This isn't the first time the Police Blotter has covered how telecommunications providers store copies of text messages--and how police have obtained them to use in criminal prosecutions.
An alleged cocaine dealer in the Washington, D.C., area had his SMS text messages used against him, as did a wire fraud defendant last year.

Some of the ground rules remain unsettled, with defense attorneys frequently arguing that privacy laws and the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment suggest that archived text messages should be--legally speaking--difficult to obtain. Police, on the other hand, believe that they should be much easier to obtain."

Guess that answers the question, it's possible.

We do not reach this contention because we conclude that any error in admission of the text messages was harmless. The government presented overwhelming separate, independent evidence of McCreary's guilt.

A document can be authenticated by the testimony of a witness with knowledge." United States v. Workinger. Here, the government properly authenticated the text messages by using the testimonies of the senior manager of the pagers' service provider, the FBI agent who compiled the records, and Hunter's co-conspirators.

As you can see, there were other factors involved in the messages being admitted into evidence.

 

[theWorldWithin]

Why risk it? Can you not just make a phone call "hey is it cool if I swing by?" and leave it at that? And are you really so innocent that assuming the evidence is inadmissible you will not be caught on other grounds?

The real threats are as follows:
1. Text messages obtained without a search warrant and without your knowledge are sufficient for most any judge to authorize a search warrant for your home!
2. The text message will most definitely be authenticated by the false testimony of a paid informant, don't be stupid, the cops plays games too.
3. Text messages are a good way to tip off the cops as to your activity even if they currently do not have enough evidence for a case, now in the future you can expect to be pulled over frequently, watched closely, and busted on any other number of charges.

Bottom line: Keep your fucking mouth shut. Say your piece in person.

 

[Transcendence]

Apparently AT&T only stores wireless text messages for 48 hours, and Sprint only stores them for two weeks:

http://www.slate.com/id/2190382/

Can anyone confirm/deny this? I was always told (and the common belief is reiterated in this thread) that phone companies store text messages for two years or more.

 

[Coolio]

Ah who puts a pre-paid phone in there own name? now thats stupid.... Of course i would recommend have tex codes as well as be very short and brief with them as well, and never register the phone in ur name, and when of course u go to make a buy or a sale, u never bring that phone with you...

If you seriously think that's smart, take a look at this so you can change your mind: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/~csoghoian/ISS_Webinar_13_MAY_08_vb_secure.pdf

Especially page 3.

See also:

 

[tobala]

^ Yeah well, you can always use snoopervision to your advantage--like buying a couple prepaid phones, giving the snoopers a grace period to "lock on target," and then throwing one in the back of the sheriff's wife's car.

 

[Coolio]

One more thing I forgot to add after my comment, was that you won't find anything in the news about this ability law enforcement has, because it's only used for investigation purposes. They can't use this stuff in court yet. So you won't hear much about it in the news... it hasn't been used to 'put people away'. But it sure does help them figure out who they should be investigating in town, and they may be able to easily outsmart you if they know where you've been and who you've been calling or visiting.