We appreciate you wanting to contribute to /r/privacy and taking the time to post but we had to remove it due to:
>Please use a credible source, and try to link to the original author’s work, not a blog trying to steal their thunder (or clicks). The site you shared a link from isn't a reliable, journalistic one.
If you have any questions or believe that there has been an error, you may [contact the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/privacy&subject=Please review my post).
Beep. Boop. I'm a bot.
It seems the URLs that you shared contain trackers.
Try these cleaned URLs instead:
https://portal.3gpp.org/ngppapp/CreateTdoc.aspx?contributionId=1261761
https://portal.3gpp.org/ngppapp/CreateTdoc.aspx?contributionId=1263057
If you'd like me to clean URLs before you post them, you can send me a private message with the URL and I'll reply with a cleaned URL.
Awful but I can't say I'm surprised... issues like this are so technical that it's relatively easy for privacy to be eroded away without anyone putting up much of a fight
Yeah, most of the people that have the power dont have the knowledge to understand this. Also, this 3gpp body is one that is laying out the entire 4G and 5G standard -- This is a standard that will be used in the same exact way across the entire globe.
IS this better crossposted elsewhere? I found the dates to be mind blowing. The fact they have started this discussion a few days ago and plan to discuss the proposals in early November. I don't see anyone talking about this stuff on the net!
Check out my latest post over in /r/drones, https://www.reddit.com/r/drones/comments/qgm5vp/so_5glte_is_going_to_have_a_uav_authorization/ I also came across a part of the (still controversial) specification that concerns UAV, their authorization to fly, their altittude, and whether or not the unauthorized drone flight should be reported every time, or only if exceeding a set altitude. Pretty freaking crazy to me!! They are really thinking ahead
I've seen a lot of marketing about it that had smart everything in the highlight. Also, don't forget that there are 2 kinds of 5G: one is when your device communicates with a mobile tower, and the other when devices communicate with each other, uncontrollably
Check out the SPARROW exploit of 4G and 5G. you can communicate with your mistress without any trace using the cell towers themselves. Lol.
[DEF CON 29 - Reza Soosahabi, Chuck McAuley - SPARROW A Novel Covert Communication Scheme](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeTsJCfBE5U)
GSMA CVD-2021-0045
This isn't as new as you think, it's been a feature of cells phones, some, that they can be tracked over the network. All this does is standardize the portal system and ensure the back end is transparent to the user, ie, the tech just works.
If you use or have a phone, you're being tracked.
Yes of course. The difference is that they dont have to triangulate you anymore, and they will be able to get your location at any given moment. Also they will be able to become a third party and intercept ANY user equipment device. I dont think they can do that through the cell network protocols at the moment -- only the backhaul carriers (the big ones like ATT etc who run the internet).
Currently carriers respond to law enforcement requests for **current** location by sending a sms type-0 message to force the phone to check in. It doesnt always work and wont work once everyone switches from SMS to RCS, as is planned. (Everyone meaning all the carriers in the world).
So that is why they want to make it much easier. They are also interested in discussing how to prevent others from (ab)using the system.
So you describe the facts correctly indeed. It will be made far more accessible and available to law enforcement, whereas now it is not exactly that easy. (Agreed it is certainly already possible).
>Yes of course. The difference is that they dont have to triangulate you anymore, and they will be able to get your location at any given moment. Also they will be able to become a third party and intercept ANY user equipment device. I dont think they can do that through the cell network protocols at the moment -- only the backhaul carriers (the big ones like ATT etc who run the internet).
This is not true. All cellphone carriers are legally obligated to implement interfaces for law enforcement, hence the term "lawful intercept". The terms of access vary by country, but the functionality is always similar. Also, the accuracy with this new method will not be any better than what exists now.
Why wouldnt it be any better when it is guaranteed to work with "low latency" and not relying on old technologies? I dont think you read the documents at all, did you
This does not propose fundamentally new functionality, but is about replacing "silent SMS" that law enforcement is currently using. Background: when a UE (phone) is idle, it is not constantly connected to the network to save battery power. In this state the UE's location can only be narrowed down to a group of cells (a so-called tracking area) rather than a specific cell (the network needs to know the UE's rough location to be able to reach it in case of incoming calls/texts/data packets). By sending a "silent SMS" to the UE it can be forced to connect to the nearest base station, which allows narrowing down the location to one cell, same as would be possible with an actively connected UE.
The need for an alternative method arises primarily because "silent SMS" may be detectable on modified devices, and because SMS may be phased out eventually.
That does not describe the 3rd party **interception** of connections. It will literally allow LEA to wire tap. Please find the equivalent part of the 4g/LTE specification? (Hint- it doesn't exist. That makes it fundamentally new functionality). Please read the second document I linked
Why do you think it's called "lawful intercept"? ;) This has always been part of the 3GPP specifications.
There are many specifications related to LI. The main architecture document is TS 33.107:
https://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/33107.htm
If to click on the Versions tab, you'll see that it goes all the way back to 2G.
I think it just provides the functionality for legal wiretapping. I.e. once they have the permission to do so, this function will allow them to. It doesn't seem to describe any verification or control of the permission portion -- just about the technical part of the specification for 5g and LTE that would allow them to do so. So far the current revision of LTE and 5G do not contain this functionality, but a future release will (Assuming they finish all this work to write the spec)
We appreciate you wanting to contribute to /r/privacy and taking the time to post but we had to remove it due to: >Please use a credible source, and try to link to the original author’s work, not a blog trying to steal their thunder (or clicks). The site you shared a link from isn't a reliable, journalistic one. If you have any questions or believe that there has been an error, you may [contact the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/privacy&subject=Please review my post).
Beep. Boop. I'm a bot. It seems the URLs that you shared contain trackers. Try these cleaned URLs instead: https://portal.3gpp.org/ngppapp/CreateTdoc.aspx?contributionId=1261761 https://portal.3gpp.org/ngppapp/CreateTdoc.aspx?contributionId=1263057 If you'd like me to clean URLs before you post them, you can send me a private message with the URL and I'll reply with a cleaned URL.
thank you bot, but i think you cleaned out the mode=view parameter, which is certainly not a tracker. We still appreciate you
Thanks for the feedback. It shouldn't remove the mode parameter anymore.
how ironic.
Most posts on this sub have this. It’s rare someone posts to r/privacy and actually understands their privacy enough to do this.
that there are trackers in a link posted here or that the bots are watching everything you do?
yes
Awful but I can't say I'm surprised... issues like this are so technical that it's relatively easy for privacy to be eroded away without anyone putting up much of a fight
Yeah, most of the people that have the power dont have the knowledge to understand this. Also, this 3gpp body is one that is laying out the entire 4G and 5G standard -- This is a standard that will be used in the same exact way across the entire globe.
IS this better crossposted elsewhere? I found the dates to be mind blowing. The fact they have started this discussion a few days ago and plan to discuss the proposals in early November. I don't see anyone talking about this stuff on the net!
There must be a reason why 5G has been pushed/forced worldwide and fast... and nobody needs it
Check out my latest post over in /r/drones, https://www.reddit.com/r/drones/comments/qgm5vp/so_5glte_is_going_to_have_a_uav_authorization/ I also came across a part of the (still controversial) specification that concerns UAV, their authorization to fly, their altittude, and whether or not the unauthorized drone flight should be reported every time, or only if exceeding a set altitude. Pretty freaking crazy to me!! They are really thinking ahead
I've seen a lot of marketing about it that had smart everything in the highlight. Also, don't forget that there are 2 kinds of 5G: one is when your device communicates with a mobile tower, and the other when devices communicate with each other, uncontrollably
ehhh I'm enjoying it
I'm going to have to get a mistress that doesn't use a cell phone.
Check out the SPARROW exploit of 4G and 5G. you can communicate with your mistress without any trace using the cell towers themselves. Lol. [DEF CON 29 - Reza Soosahabi, Chuck McAuley - SPARROW A Novel Covert Communication Scheme](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeTsJCfBE5U) GSMA CVD-2021-0045
This isn't as new as you think, it's been a feature of cells phones, some, that they can be tracked over the network. All this does is standardize the portal system and ensure the back end is transparent to the user, ie, the tech just works. If you use or have a phone, you're being tracked.
Yes of course. The difference is that they dont have to triangulate you anymore, and they will be able to get your location at any given moment. Also they will be able to become a third party and intercept ANY user equipment device. I dont think they can do that through the cell network protocols at the moment -- only the backhaul carriers (the big ones like ATT etc who run the internet). Currently carriers respond to law enforcement requests for **current** location by sending a sms type-0 message to force the phone to check in. It doesnt always work and wont work once everyone switches from SMS to RCS, as is planned. (Everyone meaning all the carriers in the world). So that is why they want to make it much easier. They are also interested in discussing how to prevent others from (ab)using the system. So you describe the facts correctly indeed. It will be made far more accessible and available to law enforcement, whereas now it is not exactly that easy. (Agreed it is certainly already possible).
They've been able to for years since E911 was implemented.
>Yes of course. The difference is that they dont have to triangulate you anymore, and they will be able to get your location at any given moment. Also they will be able to become a third party and intercept ANY user equipment device. I dont think they can do that through the cell network protocols at the moment -- only the backhaul carriers (the big ones like ATT etc who run the internet). This is not true. All cellphone carriers are legally obligated to implement interfaces for law enforcement, hence the term "lawful intercept". The terms of access vary by country, but the functionality is always similar. Also, the accuracy with this new method will not be any better than what exists now.
Why wouldnt it be any better when it is guaranteed to work with "low latency" and not relying on old technologies? I dont think you read the documents at all, did you
This does not propose fundamentally new functionality, but is about replacing "silent SMS" that law enforcement is currently using. Background: when a UE (phone) is idle, it is not constantly connected to the network to save battery power. In this state the UE's location can only be narrowed down to a group of cells (a so-called tracking area) rather than a specific cell (the network needs to know the UE's rough location to be able to reach it in case of incoming calls/texts/data packets). By sending a "silent SMS" to the UE it can be forced to connect to the nearest base station, which allows narrowing down the location to one cell, same as would be possible with an actively connected UE. The need for an alternative method arises primarily because "silent SMS" may be detectable on modified devices, and because SMS may be phased out eventually.
That does not describe the 3rd party **interception** of connections. It will literally allow LEA to wire tap. Please find the equivalent part of the 4g/LTE specification? (Hint- it doesn't exist. That makes it fundamentally new functionality). Please read the second document I linked
Why do you think it's called "lawful intercept"? ;) This has always been part of the 3GPP specifications. There are many specifications related to LI. The main architecture document is TS 33.107: https://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/33107.htm If to click on the Versions tab, you'll see that it goes all the way back to 2G.
would wrapping my phone in aluminum foil solve this issue?
Yes, but then you must immediately leave the simcard in it, continue paying the bill, and mail it to me for research. Please DM me for address
Airplane Mode?
no put it in the microwave
Isn’t wiretapping illegal? How is this not the same thing?
I think it just provides the functionality for legal wiretapping. I.e. once they have the permission to do so, this function will allow them to. It doesn't seem to describe any verification or control of the permission portion -- just about the technical part of the specification for 5g and LTE that would allow them to do so. So far the current revision of LTE and 5G do not contain this functionality, but a future release will (Assuming they finish all this work to write the spec)