1997-01-26 - Re: Cellular location…

Header Data

From: Three Blind Mice <3bmice@nym.alias.net>
To: <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Message Hash: a43a55f1721374b6c3d7be4a1359dcec87e7a23c2f41ef527ecd47c2ca8ee08f
Message ID: <19970126225416.15792.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-26 22:54:22 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:54:22 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Three Blind Mice <3bmice@nym.alias.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:54:22 -0800 (PST)
To: <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Re: Cellular location...
Message-ID: <19970126225416.15792.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote:

> I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and
> have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel.  There
> would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to
> triangulate every call.  The primary motivation for this is almost certainly
> "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers.

Of course, one could always follow the ID4 example and triangulate cells
from a single location, preferably using equipment that any small-time
operator can find in his own car.

-- 3bmice







Thread