Prison Phone Monopoly Securus Under Fire Again, This Time For Doling Out Everybody's Private Phone Location Data
from the don't-pass-go,-don't-collect-$200 dept
For years now we've noted how a company by the name of Securus has managed to obtain a pretty cozy, government-supported monopoly over prison phone and teleconferencing services. Like any monopoly, this prison monopoly has pretty traditionally resulted in not only sky high rates upwards of $14 per minute for phone calls, but comically poor service as well. It's something advocates (like outgoing FCC staffer Mignon Clyburn) have been trying to rectify for years, only to have Trump FCC boss Ajit Pai completely deflate those efforts last year.
But Securus' monopoly -- and the government pampering and cronyism that helped create it -- has other additional costs as well. Interstate inmate calling service (ICS) companies effectively buy their privileged positions from local governments, who then expect some favors in return. For example, Securus was recently accused of routinely spying on privileged inmate attorney communications, information that was only revealed after Securus was hacked in late 2015. Given the generalized apathy for prison inmates and their families ("Iff'n ya don't like high prices, don't go to prison son!") reform on this front has been glacial at best.
Meanwhile, the problems caused by these government-sanctioned monopolies continue to pile up. A recent court case has also exposed how some law enforcement officials also make routine use of a Securus service that helps track people’s cellphones without court orders. While the service is marketed to government as a way for law enforcement to track fleeing drug treatment or even Alzheimer's patients, zero oversight means it's routinely abused. In this case, the law enforcement official used the Securus service to not only track members of the general public, but Judges and other law enforcement officials as well:
"The service can find the whereabouts of almost any cellphone in the country within seconds. It does this by going through a system typically used by marketers and other companies to get location data from major cellphone carriers, including AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon, documents show.
Between 2014 and 2017, the sheriff, Cory Hutcheson, used the service at least 11 times, prosecutors said. His alleged targets included a judge and members of the State Highway Patrol. Mr. Hutcheson, who was dismissed last year in an unrelated matter, has pleaded not guilty in the surveillance cases."
In addition to being another warning about the threat of government-pampered monopolies, the scandal again highlights how our nonexistent to lax consumer privacy laws (especially for wireless carriers) routinely come back to bite us. In this instance, Securus was easily able to buy cell carrier location data, then upload it to a company portal. Law enforcement officials can then easily plug in a cell phone number to track its location, provided they supply an "official document giving permission." Overview of the validity of these documents appears to be half-assed at best.
We've long noted that wireless carriers routinely sell browsing, location and other data to absolutely everyone, and while these companies insist that "anonymizing" the data protects user identities (it doesn't), the rules governing the use of such data are laughable at best. Efforts to then pass more meaningful privacy protections then get quickly and repeatedly scuttled by influential lobbyists, as companies fight tooth and nail against any measures that could possibly hamstring user data monetization efforts.
As you might expect, Securus took no ownsership of the scandal or the routine abuse of private data:
"Securus requires documentation and reasonably relies on the professionalism and integrity of our law enforcement customers and their counsel. Securus is neither a judge nor a district attorney, and the responsibility of ensuring the legal adequacy of supporting documentation lies with our law enforcement customers and their counsel."
Senator Ron Wyden, meanwhile, has fired off a letter to FCC boss Ajit Pai (pdf), lamenting the fact that the oversight of this entire process is the glorified equivalent of a "pinky promise":
"I recently learned that Securus Technologies, a major provider of correctional-facility telephone services, purchases real-time location information from major wireless carriers and provides that information, via a self-service web portal, to the government for nothing more than the legal equivalent of a pinky promise. This practice skirts wireless carrier's legal obligation to be the sole conduit by which the government conducts surveillance of Americans' phone records, and needlessly exposes millions of Americans to potential abuse and surveillance by the government."
Securus is the perfect storm created by lax privacy rules, rampant cronyism, the government's tendency to pamper and embolden monopolies, and the routine skirting of wiretap and privacy law by corporations and law enforcement alike.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ajit pai, fcc, law enforcement, location data, prison, prison phone calls
Companies: securos
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Securus is not the problem
In this case, they're right. How do they get data on people who aren't in prison? As Wyden writes, they "[purchase] real-time location information from major wireless carriers". So forget about Securus and its warrant policy; another company could get data the same way, and implement whatever access policy it wants to. It's not abusing private data—if it's available on the open market it's not private at all.
The real scandal is that the phone companies are selling data people thought was private. They are the ones that should be requiring a warrant.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Securus is not the problem
In this case, they're right. How do they get data on people who aren't in prison? As Wyden writes, they "[purchase] real-time location information from major wireless carriers". So forget about Securus and its warrant policy; another company could get data the same way, and implement whatever access policy it wants to. It's not abusing private data—if it's available on the open market it's not private at all.
The real scandal is that the phone companies are selling data people thought was private. They are the ones that should be requiring a warrant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Securus is not the problem
This has been known for a long time. You're paying to be the product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Securus is not the problem
This shit sometimes seems like a parody of itself, as if these companies want strict GDPR-like regulations. Nobody should be surprised when that happens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[Laughs]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only private data...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Private Prisons For Profit... The Land Of The Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How exactly does someone go about buying location data from a mobile ISP to allow for geolocating a mobile phone?
I feel this should be given much more scrutiny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WHO SAID??
YEARS ago when the states and FED, ran their own services it was Somewhat cheap.. THEN it was reminded of 2 things..
The fed/State was not supposed to run its OWN business if a corp was doing the same in competition..
AND KICK BACKS ARE COOL..esp if you OWN part of the company..
There are a few words for this..Anyone know them??
Conspiracy?
Undo influence?
more??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fascism is strongly associated with the merging of corporate and government interests, though the term "oligarchy" might be more applicable here—"A government run by only a few, often the wealthy."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
is a system of government which is run by the worst, least qualified, or most unscrupulous citizens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny, I just read "Researchers Find Breathalyzers To Be Just More Faulty Cop Tech Capable Of Putting Innocent People In Jail". Seems like the only way to avoid being put in jail in the US is to not be in the US. Mere innocence is not a defence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Uhhh.... not so effective. See also: Kim Dotcom etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can try it yourself at https://www.locationsmart.com/try/
https://www.locationsmart.com/try/
As a private citizen, I gave it my cell phone number, my name and e-mail address and consent via an SMS reply. After that, he web portal permitted me to look for my cell.
My iPhone "location services" including GPS is OFF. When I searched using the "A-GPS" option it said my number was "not locatable at this time."
The "Cell Tower" search presents a Google Map with a generous (mile diameter?) circle that included my location and a pin that I assume is the tower. Virgin Mobile is my carrier but the screen said Sprint.
I'm a little surprised it did not text me when it subsequently revealed my approximate location using the web portal. Sure, I gave consent, but a reminder would have been polite, no?
After playing with the demo, I terminated my LocationSmart user agreement via e-mail to the company and asked them to send me a list of all the prior searches of my phone just for fun since I had not knowingly consented to any.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
some facts to add ...
2) inmates have to agree to location tracking before making calls. This in turn allows pretty effective control of who inmates are speaking to and about what related to criminal patterns and plots.
3) inmate phone services aid in reducing jail time by affording ease of communications for arraignments, discussions with Legal assistance, and Judge interviews. Not to mention staying in contact with friends and family.
4) incarcerated inmates should expect no privacy such as a normal person outside of jails would expect.
5) disclaimer; not representing this as all perfectly good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: some facts to add ...
You're missing the point of this story: normal people outside of jails, who are not communicating with inmates, are having their privacy invaded (location tracked) by this prison-phone company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: some facts to add ...
Pity that this same level of privacy does not extend to other sensitive communications, such as medical records or communication between rape victims and psychologists, doctors and counsellors. While they nominally exist, the protections for medical records are weak compared to the protections for communications between criminals and lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: some facts to add ...
Content privacy, yes, but not location privacy. Come to think of it, why do the prisons even need the tracking? Isn't it always going to give them the prison's address?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: some facts to add ...
Sounds like an effective tool not just for inmates but also for government and board rooms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: some facts to add ...
There's the solution. Write this lobbyist-tracking app and publish the result, and we'll quickly see a warrant requirement—Bork all over again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And Pai fired back... "who gives a s*it because, you know... money."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]