From: “Brian T Hancher” <briant@atlantic.net>
To: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Message Hash: aed949edf4975ae4241b1e86842718f1f01902d18fcc67bfcc4a85417db42228
Message ID: <199608021149.LAA24441@rio.atlantic.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-02 21:40:15 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:40:15 +0800
From: "Brian T Hancher" <briant@atlantic.net>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:40:15 +0800
To: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Subject: Re: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <199608021149.LAA24441@rio.atlantic.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>P.S. Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?
It is my understanding that police need a warrant to tap *cellular*
phones, but not *wireless* phones.
One should understand that monitoring cellular traffic is *much* more
difficult than tapping a conventional phone, because as the user
moves around in the service area the phone switches to different
repeaters, often several times during a conversation.
I am curious as to the language of the proposed law, as it is also my
understanding that the government already has the (technical) means to monitor
cellular traffic (but it requires a warrant, just like tapping a
regular phone).
Brian T. Hancher
http://rio.atlantic.net/~briant
briant@ocala.com
briant@atlantic.net
Brian.Hancher@lmi.fdles.state.fl.us
Return to August 1996
Return to ““Brian T Hancher” <briant@atlantic.net>”
1996-08-02 (Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:40:15 +0800) - Re: [off-topic] roving wiretaps - “Brian T Hancher” <briant@atlantic.net>