It's Stupid to Text

[Guest010218]

Among eccie PMs, text messages and voice calls, the text messages are the most risky in my opinion, then followed by PMs, and with voice calls being the least risky.

Why? Long answer follows for the skeptics. My opinion--others may differ.

First, the interception of voice calls requires LE to show probable cause to get a wiretap warrant through a judge with strict controls on what can be recorded. In my experience, they normally only do this for big cases, national security, and organized criminal activity--more than just an individual john setting up a single appointment with a provider. If they want to go back and see who you have been calling, all they can collect are call-detail records. Phone companies have strict rules and processes place to ensure this voice interception and call-detail records not abused by LE, or by phone company employees trying to do a friend a favor.

The collection of voice call-detail records would require LE to show probable cause to get a warrant for your telecom carrier records. Voice call detail records normally are available for each and every call to/from your phone for approximately 60 days as normal business any by government regulations. It may take several days to weeks for this information to be provided. Governments bureaucracies dealing with phone company bureaucracies--but it can happen fast in emergencies or exigent circumstances when lives are at stake--paper work then follows.

You may wish to check the on-line records of your phone via your phone company web page to see how far your personal billing records go back. These records do NOT contain voice call content, but simply show who and when you have been communicating. There may be some location information about where your cell phone was located when you used it. They may also be able to track the location of your phone in the past. All of these call-detail records are routinely requested by divorce lawyers as a happy hunting ground when building a case against a wayward spouse.

LE and divorce lawyers still have to get a legal subpoena to require the phone company to turn over the records. The phone companies will then bill the lawyer and LE for the reasonable costs to maintain, obtain and assemble these records--not cheap so LE normally does this only for bigger cases. Divorce lawyers don't care how much as they are reimbursed by you when the judges grants approval of the settlement, which normally include the lawyer's bill and his expenses. Double whammy.

Second, the collection of eccie PMs would require LE to have probable cause to get a warrant for eccie servers through a judge and they would have to specify who (associate your RW name and handle) and demonstrate/show probable cause as to why they want/need your records. They may ask back as long as eccie maintains PMs in backup storage. (You are frequently erasing your PMs when you are done communicating with friend? Right.)

May I suggest that hobbyists not keep months of old PMs in their private sent and in-box accounts. What about the person who received your PM--they need to erase the PM also or it remains in their in-box.

But once you erase the PMs, eccie may still have backup archives of PMs--hope not, but I have no idea how long those might be available. It is more likely that there are backups available for current PM that have not erased and maybe some for some that have been erased. Again LE or an lawyer would have to be able to associate your RW name and handle. Companies may also ask LE for reasonable costs, so this usually means an important case, not a fishing expedition.

Finally, the collection of text messages would require LE or a lawyer to have probable cause to obtain a warrant for your cell phone carrier's text message records. Text message records are normally available for each and every msg to/from your phone and will also include text message content as well as message detail information. These records and text messages may be available for 60 days or longer as normal business records needed for billing questions.

In my opinion, these text messages are the most risky of all, since they are available for LE and divorce lawyers to go back and review, long after they have established probable cause to obtain the message content. All they need is your phone number associated with your handle. It does no good to erase your text messages as the original messages are retained on the cell phone carrier's system for at least 60 days.

Most carriers limit and erase records as soon as possible and only keep records for 60 days required by government regulations. It is very expensive for phone companies to maintain large (Petabytes of data) data bases with records on line when they no longer need. There may also be tape/disk storage maintained off line. When the carriers maintain these backup records, they are more liable when responding to legal demands from LE and others. Their risk mitigation strategy is to strictly maintain only that required by law.

Think about the recent concerns of the privacy advocates and civil libertarians in the press with respect to possible government snooping of these types of records for national security purposes--this is the largest "huge data" challenge available--do you think we have some national security agencies able to meet that challenge? Many do.

If you wonder how I know this, I used to work for a phone company and had to deal with legal demands and subpoenas on a daily basis. Most were for voice call-detail records, emails and text message content. Yes, email providers also have to keep email records to respond to legal demands.

If anyone can link your hobby phone number, or your hobby email or PMs to any part of your real world identity, it is then becomes easy to cross-line more info and then to your credit card records, toll road travel, property records, medical, arrests, convictions, etc. We have long digital footprints which are most almost impossible to erase.

If you are still reading, thanks for hanging in there. I hope my opinions and observations are useful and informative about protecting your digital identity and personal information in all environments.

[michaelbolton]

That was informative, thanks Bugle. I think by most risky, you mean texts are easiest to obtain for those seeking them. Sounds right to me

[angler]

Originally Posted by michaelbolton

...and texts are only circumstantial assuming you're not foolish enough to go ultra explicit with it...they have nothing, really...

these days without audio or video and explicit transactional conversation, they got nothing...

and texts are far weaker evidence than voicemail: PROVE i wrote the text

You could not be more wrong. In every case where a madam has been busted the jewels for LE was her computer with all the John lists and telephone numbers. This happened in the big Houston case a couple of years ago as well as the big Washington D.C. madam case where she was found hung to death. And the Heidi Fleiss affair and the Mayflower Madam in New York and there you go forever and ever.

In each of these cases the Johns list was prime for LE. They didn't use the list to make cases against the Johns for prostitution. They started files on the persons listed, and cross indexed them for other offfenses such as narcotics. It put a spotlight on each person on the list, and sometimes those persons were leaked to wives, employers and others. Being found on a Johns list is something to absolutely be avoided.

Now as far as "PROVE I wrote the text" is concerned, I beg to remind you that such levels of evidence may be germane at trial, but I think our goal is to not leave anything around
that would garner suspicion in the first place, or cause LE to seek an arrest. LE can arrest someone knowing there may be insufficient evidence for a conviction at trial. All LE needs is reasonable suspicion and a good faith belief based on probable cause to swear out an affidavit and proceed with an arrest and get the process rolling. But even at trial if the jury wants to believe that you wrote the text you will find yourself convicted. Juries every day find against defendants for which there is objectively ample reasonable doubt but they convict anyway.

Let's not be arrogant or boastful here. Be humble and avoid trouble.

[tpepsi]

Would it be in the best interest of this site and its members to delete all the schoolgirl reviews and PM's? You know, like Hillary Clinton did?

[austingeek]

google voice plus offshore VPN app (or TOR router) on your phone about covers it. A warrant would lead to an email address and a series of offshore IP addresses associated with that email address.

[Toyz]

Originally Posted by tpepsi

Would it be in the best interest of this site and its members to delete all the schoolgirl reviews and PM's? You know, like Hillary Clinton did?

There sure are a ton of reviews of that "agency" by Austin mongers! Not to mention all of the promotional threADS calling out what a good group of girls and great management they had.

Do you know that one Fandle wrote 13 reviews for them??? THIRTEEN!!

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1056723459&hi ghlight=sgbj#post1056723459

[Cat in the Hat]

Forget the legal aspects of acquiring text data for a moment if you are married, in a relationship or just dating an extremely suspicious and insecure lady. All they need is the time you are in the shower alone with your phone to install software that copies off and allows them to monitor all that activity in the future.

[pussycat]

Originally Posted by austingeek

google voice plus offshore VPN app (or TOR router) on your phone about covers it. A warrant would lead to an email address and a series of offshore IP addresses associated with that email address.

Austingeek did you go to Blackhat this year? If you did you would know your info is totally out of date. It's funny how many techies there are in Austin but every one I meet here is way behind the curve. When I was at Blackhat I didn't run into a single person from Austin.

Google sells the device id's of everyone who uses Google voice. They sell it to private investigators for a fee, and provide it to government agencies for free.

You don't really think the government would let someone like Google operate a phone service that's really anonymous do you?

It's well known that all the phone companies have been giving over customer info to the government WITHOUT ANY WARRANTS for many years.

An "onion browser" or TOR is not as safe as you think either.

Governments other than the US government can't access the IPs, but if you watched the Ross Ullrich trial you should know that the NSA and FBI now are tracking TOR users.

TOR was invented by the Department of Defense specifically to support dissidents in Iran, and then it began to be used by privacy advocates and criminals. But now the US government has brought it back under their control.

[shlonghaul]

Originally Posted by Cat in the Hat

Forget the legal aspects of acquiring text data for a moment if you are married, in a relationship or just dating an extremely suspicious and insecure lady. All they need is the time you are in the shower alone with your phone to install software that copies off and allows them to monitor all that activity in the future.

Bam peanut butter jelly and jam, that why we got dem dar trac phone paid for in cash whilst in disguise in another county or state.

[SOULFLY]

Texting isn't stupid, communicating sexual acts for money is. Void of that they have no way of knowing what you did with the time you hired an escort for, whether it was dinner companion, or you were balls deep bcd.

[Windinhishair]

Originally Posted by SOULFLY

Texting isn't stupid, communicating sexual acts for money is. Void of that they have no way of knowing what you did with the time you hired an escort for, whether it was dinner companion, or you were balls deep bcd.

As always a little behind the curve.

As your boss/owner/master already pointed out the intent isn't to convict you. It is to drag you into the limelight and through the mud.

All they need is reasonable suspicion to do that.

A text connection provides exactly that.

Don't make me break out the pebbles. We know how you hate them.

Toyz give us the appropriate pebble hater pic please.

[Toyz]

[Iron Butterfly]

PETA!


IB

[GneissGuy]

To me, the big thing about text vs. voice is that they can get the text after the fact. Also, text is so much easier to work with than listening to voice records.

Start in investigation on Hooker R Us on August 21, get a warrant for their cell phone records, read all their text messages for the past 12 months or whatever. Sit on your fat ass at the computer eating donuts and read the text messages of everyone who dealt with them in the past.

[illuminati]

Originally Posted by Toyz

There sure are a ton of reviews of that "agency" by Austin mongers! Not to mention all of the promotional threADS calling out what a good group of girls and great management they had.

Do you know that one Fandle wrote 13 reviews for them??? THIRTEEN!!

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1056723459&hi ghlight=sgbj#post1056723459

isn't it ironic that the amount of reviews from the fandle for that agency is similar to the size of his shoe?? Or is it IQ???