Marketing Privacy as a Feature
Paxx Telecom has issued a press release that they’ll hand over records only when given a court order:
The recent revelation first made by USA Today that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been commandeering phone records of tens of millions of ordinary Americans has shocked those who cherish their privacy and do not agree with unnecessary snooping by their government.
…
At Paxx Telecom, our records are secured offsite and we guarantee never to turn over any records to the government or anyone else without a court order. All our customers need do is dial a short access number in front of the number they want to reach. As a result, the local phone company will show only the connection to Paxx Telecom. It will have no record of the actual number the customer talked to”, he said. “In addition, we keep call records on our servers only temporarily to give customers access to verify proper invoicing, after which the calling information will be extinguished.
Via the excellent Canadian Privacy Law blog. New AT&T logo from Lucky225.
“Without a court order”, they say.
What happens when someone walks in with a USAPATRIOT Section 215 demand for records? Then they risk arrest if they follow their policy. Arizona’s full of stubborn principled people who would do just that, but if I were calling a reporter to expose government wrongdoing I’d hesitate to trust a stranger to be willing to go to jail for me. But targeted surveillance like that is only one small part of the landscape
Technical question for the SS7/CDR experts: if SBC/ATT handles my home local and long distance service, then if I dial + , does SBC/ATT by default have a record of the reporter’s number? If so, these folks aren’t really protecting against “driftnet” surveillance either.