179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Alan Marr
To:
,
Date:
Wed, 28 Sep 1994 12:42:44 -0700
Subject:
Re: Re: FSOL/e-mail addresses/Scanner
Msg-Id:
<199409281942.MAA15482@netcom7.netcom.com>
Mbox:
idm.9409.gz
From idm-owner@hyperreal.com Wed Sep 28 10:09:50 1994 From: JT <jmilhoan@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Subject: Re: Re: FSOL/e-mail addresses/Scanner To: idm@hyperreal.com Sender: owner-idm@hyperreal.com > >NOSY) citizen and given to the police. The court ruled that cordless > >phone conversations were _not_ protected by the right to privacy (I seem > >to recall that there was a big uproar about this). Besides, the UK has By law in the US, monitoring cordless phones (those in the home in the 40-something MHz band) is LEGAL. Monitoring the cellular band (800+MHz band) is ILLEGAL. Just listening to it can get you busted. Many radio manufacturers try to avoid trouble by preventing reception of the 800 MHz band without mods, but then they go and publish the mods, which usually involve cutting a diode or pathway. Some manufacturers don't bother with this, and even still, there is legislature trying to prevent the reception even if the radio has to be modified... which, uh, kinda eliminates some TVs that can be fine tuned in the UHF range. ;) This is essentially US law, but there are a couple of refinements. A lot of old scanners belong to members of the public and I believe that they were grandfathered in, i.e. not confiscated. It is now illegal to manufacture and sell scanners. To handle the situation of the old scanners, it is legal for the owner to use them under some circumstances, but they can't legally share the information with anyone else. Basically with electronic communications, at the very least, you can't share it, but unless you are sure otherwise, don't even bother listening. An important telecommunications bill was killed in the US Senate by a combination of special interests objecting to funding provisions and Republican obstruction of other legislation (filibustering election finance reform). It had some good and interesting safeguards of privacy of electronic information such as protecting bank card PINs and transaction codes. These safeguards had been endorsed by the EFF. Alan.