

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Two Stanford graduate students proved this by doing the snooping themselves. Since November, they have surveyed the phone records of 546 volunteers and consulted Yelp and Google Places directories to determine how much sensitive personal information metadata can reveal. Participants installed a "MetaPhone" app on their Android phones to enable the surveillance.
"The degree of sensitivity among contacts took us aback," wrote researchers Jonathan Mayer and Patrick Mutchler in an announcement of their findings published Wednesday. "We found that phone metadata is unambiguously sensitive, even in a small population and over a short time window."
Using phone metadata, the researchers inferred sensitive information about people's lives, including: neurological and heart conditions, gun ownership, marijuana cultivation, abortion, and participation in Alcoholics Anonymous. While participants consented to having their identities revealed, the researchers opted to keep them anonymous due to the sensitive nature of their findings.
As the researchers point out, this study directly contradicts the repeated assurance by President Obama that the NSA "is not looking at people's names, and they're not looking at content."
They warn that the metadata they had access to is dwarfed by what the amount the NSA has access to. "The dataset that we analyzed in this report spanned hundreds of users over several months. Phone records held by the NSA and telecoms span millions of Americans over multiple years."
_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Two Stanford graduate students proved this by doing the snooping themselves. Since November, they have surveyed the phone records of 546 volunteers and consulted Yelp and Google Places directories to determine how much sensitive personal information metadata can reveal. Participants installed a "MetaPhone" app on their Android phones to enable the surveillance.
"The degree of sensitivity among contacts took us aback," wrote researchers Jonathan Mayer and Patrick Mutchler in an announcement of their findings published Wednesday. "We found that phone metadata is unambiguously sensitive, even in a small population and over a short time window."
Using phone metadata, the researchers inferred sensitive information about people's lives, including: neurological and heart conditions, gun ownership, marijuana cultivation, abortion, and participation in Alcoholics Anonymous. While participants consented to having their identities revealed, the researchers opted to keep them anonymous due to the sensitive nature of their findings.
As the researchers point out, this study directly contradicts the repeated assurance by President Obama that the NSA "is not looking at people's names, and they're not looking at content."
They warn that the metadata they had access to is dwarfed by what the amount the NSA has access to. "The dataset that we analyzed in this report spanned hundreds of users over several months. Phone records held by the NSA and telecoms span millions of Americans over multiple years."
_____________________

Two Stanford graduate students proved this by doing the snooping themselves. Since November, they have surveyed the phone records of 546 volunteers and consulted Yelp and Google Places directories to determine how much sensitive personal information metadata can reveal. Participants installed a "MetaPhone" app on their Android phones to enable the surveillance.
"The degree of sensitivity among contacts took us aback," wrote researchers Jonathan Mayer and Patrick Mutchler in an announcement of their findings published Wednesday. "We found that phone metadata is unambiguously sensitive, even in a small population and over a short time window."
Using phone metadata, the researchers inferred sensitive information about people's lives, including: neurological and heart conditions, gun ownership, marijuana cultivation, abortion, and participation in Alcoholics Anonymous. While participants consented to having their identities revealed, the researchers opted to keep them anonymous due to the sensitive nature of their findings.
As the researchers point out, this study directly contradicts the repeated assurance by President Obama that the NSA "is not looking at people's names, and they're not looking at content."
They warn that the metadata they had access to is dwarfed by what the amount the NSA has access to. "The dataset that we analyzed in this report spanned hundreds of users over several months. Phone records held by the NSA and telecoms span millions of Americans over multiple years."
_____________________