It seems shocking to me that deleting the messages off the phones makes them inaccessible to prosecution, when presumably there are backups on multiple servers controlled by telecom companies and other government entities.
It seems shocking to me that deleting the messages off the phones makes them inaccessible to prosecution, when presumably there are backups on multiple servers controlled by telecom companies and other government entities.
In the US, for example AT&T is only a couple of days; Verizon, 3-10 days for SMS contents. Everything else like subscriber info, call history, tower location, tower dumps, range-to-tower can be years.
In EU similar patchwork.
(source: me half century in field)
Actual message content is kept only for a short period of time.
https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-center-locations-and-contact-info...
The key thing is to have a policy or practice. If your policy is to purge texts after 7 days, that’s a defensible position. If your behavior is to throw your phone in the river around the time of your communicating about a matter of interest to a litigant, that reflects poorly.
Also, if I'm a provider, keeping all those text messages is going to be a more of a liability than a benefit. It's an expense for storage and retrieval. I'm not sure they would really make any money off of maintaining a long history; it would be super rare that this would pay off. Better to just state that "after n days, they are gone, we're done. Archiving is up to you, the customer."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory#Origin_and_U...
> The earliest known usage was by the American author Charles Astor Bristed, in a letter to the editor published in The New York Times on January 11, 1863.
> The term "conspiracy theory" is itself the subject of a conspiracy theory, which posits that the term was popularized by the CIA in order to discredit conspiratorial believers, particularly critics of the Warren Commission, by making them a target of ridicule.
Who popularized it is subjective.
What isn't subjective: the CIA indeed sent out a memo about this. It marked an increase in the use of the term in popular media publications. You can find it and read it.
> the CIA indeed sent out a memo about this
Wow, the CIA noticed something and sent a memo?
AT&T is almost certainly not storing every text message long-term. The NSA likely is. It wouldn't be surprising if that's via a direct PRISM-style integration, but it still means subpoenaing AT&T for old texts is likely to not be productive. (As it was not productive in this particular case.)
Subpoena the NSA and they'll say "no, for national security reasons".
6 billion text messages are sent per day in the US. That's about the volume of Google web searches, and I know from experience Google doesn't have the capacity to log every search or the logs of evaluation of every search. If Google lacks the capacity, I suspect the NSA lacks the capacity.
6 billion SMS messages, at a max length of 160 characters, is 1 terrabyte of raw text. I think that the NSA has the cash to shell out $100 for a new 1TB hard drive every day... (not even including compression, of which it is highly, highly compressible)
I already operate on the assumption that all text messages (like all emails) are scanned and stored somewhere to my detriment.
The only tool that I know of that can encrypt SMS messages is Silence. The source code is quite stale.
The fifth amendment allows an individual to refuse to disclose a password in criminal trials (they can be compelled to open biometric locks, hwoever). I don't know if these protections would extend to civil proceedings such as occurred here; if not, the judge could hold such witnesses in contempt.