|
'E911' Turns Cell Phones into Tracking Devices
by Chris Oakes
3:10pm 6.Jan.98.PST
Cell phones will be taking on a new role in 1998, beginning a
slow transition to becoming user tracking devices. The outcome
of this shift reassures some, but has others calling for restrictions
on how cell-locating information can be used.
The impending first phase of the FCC's rules is aimed at enabling
emergency services personnel to quickly get information on the
location of a cell phone user in the event of a 911 call. By April,
all cellular and personal communications services providers will
have to transmit to 911 operators and other "public safety answering
points" the telephone number and cell site location of any cell
phone making a 911 call.
The aim of the law is to bring to cell phone users the same automatic-locating
capability that now exists with wireline phones. But while the
FCC's aim is simple on the surface - to make it easier for medical,
fire, and police teams to locate and respond to callers in distress
- the technology is also giving rise to concerns over the ease
with which the digital age and its wireless accouterments are
bringing to tracking individuals.
"The technology is pretty much developing to create a more and
more precise location information. The key question for us is
'what is the legal standard for government access?'" says James
Dempsey, senior staff counsel at the Center for Democracy and
Technology.
Those seeking restrictions on the use of cell phone tracking information
emphasize that, unlike the stationary wireline phones, a cell
phone is more specifically associated with an individual and their
minute-by-minute location.
In December, the FCC began requiring wireless providers to automatically
patch through any emergency calls made through their networks.
Subscriber or not, bills paid or unpaid, anyone with a cell phone
and a mobile identification number was thus guaranteed to see
their 911 calls completed.
1998 brings new rules into place that take that initial action
much further. By April, emergency service personnel will receive
more than just the call - they'll also get the originating cell
phone's telephone number and, more significantly, the location
of the cell site that handled the call.
The FCC's "Enhanced 911 services" requirements that wireless providers
make this information available is the beginning of a tracking
system that by 2001 will be able to locate a phone within a 125-meter
radius.
To provide this precise location information, Jeffrey Nelson of
the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association says different
carriers will choose different methods of gathering location information,
but all of them involve detecting the radio frequencies sent from
the phone to service antennas. Because a phone sends additional
signals to other antennas in addition to the primary one, "triangulation"
lets them calculate the caller's whereabouts within that multi-antenna
region. All this happens automatically when a cell phone is turned
on.
The upshot, Nelson says, is that cellular callers will "be able
to make a call to 911 or the appropriate emergency number without
having to explain where they are." He cites a case in which a
woman stranded in a blizzard, unable to tell where she was, was
located by use of her cell phone. Various systems are being tested
by most providers, he reports, but many are already working with
methods to provide such location information today.
But this tracking issue has privacy advocates seeking preventive
legislation to see that the instant accessibility of the information
to emergency units doesn't just as easily deliver the same tracking
information to law enforcement agencies - from local police on
up to the FBI.
"The FCC has been in the picture from the 911 perspective," says
Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology. But to him,
this obvious emergency benefit of E911 necessitates legal action
to draw boundaries around its use by other organizations, namely
law enforcement.
That's where the issue runs into the same waters as the controversy
surrounding the expansion of the Communications Assistance for
Law Enforcement Act. That 1994 law was meant to keep communications
companies from letting the advancement of digital and wireless
technology become an obstacle to the surveillance needs of law
enforcement agencies. But the CDT and the Electronic Frontier
Foundation, among others, have argued that as CALEA undergoes
actual implementation (a process that is still ongoing), the FBI
is seeking to expand its surveillance capabilities by seeking
unjust specifications for phone systems' compliance with the law.
Dempsey wants to see both CALEA and the new E911 requirements
be implemented with clear restrictions on the ability of law enforcement
to tap into personal information on users, especially their whereabouts
at any one time.
With the implementation of E911, Dempsey says that in effect,
"your phone has become an ankle bracelet. Therefore we are urging
the standard for government access be increased to a full probable
cause standard. [Law enforcement agencies] have to have suspicion
to believe that the person they are targeting is engaged in criminal
activity." Currently, he says, to get a court order allowing the
surveillance of cell phone use, law enforcement only has to prove
that the information sought - not the individual - is relevant
to an ongoing investigation.
"It says to law enforcement you've got to have a link between
the person you're targeting and the crime at issue," Dempsey says.
"It cannot be a mere fishing expedition." While the CDT and others
seek beefed-up constitutional restrictions on the ability for
law enforcement to obtain court orders in such cases, the FBI
says the process for obtaining such court orders is already adequate.
"We work under the strict provisions of the law with regard to
our ability to obtain a court order," said Barry Smith, supervisory
special agent in the FBI's office of public affairs. "Law enforcement's
access to [cell phone data] falls very much within the parameters
of the Fourth Amendment." He also says that under CALEA, the call
data the FBI seeks does not provide the specific location of a
wireless phone.
The FCC and its E911 requirements are distinct from CALEA, but
because they offer the ultimate form of tracking information -
far more instantly and explicitly than the FBI is seeking in the
implementation of CALEA, E911 may be ripe for access by law enforcement
for non-emergency needs.
As for the distinction between the dispute over CALEA and the
FCC's E911 services, Smith says the latter has nothing to do with
the FBI. "There's not any crossover between the two."
But, says Dempsey, when law enforcement serves a court order,
they could get location information through the requirements established
by E911.
|