Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
China Cellphones

Chinese Police are Using Cellphone Data to Track Down Protesters (cnn.com) 67

CNN reports on the aftermath of last weekend's protests against the Chinese government: A protester told CNN they received a phone call Wednesday from a police officer, who revealed they were tracked because their cellphone signal was recorded in the vicinity of the protest site.... When they denied being there, the caller asked: "Then why did your cellphone number show up there?"

In China, all mobile phone users are required by law to register their real name and national identification number with telecom providers. The protester was also told to report to a police station for questioning and to sign a written record....

In Shanghai, where some of the boldest protests took place with crowds calling for Xi's removal on two consecutive nights, police searched residents' cellphones in the streets and in the subway for VPNs that can be used to circumvent China's internet firewall, or apps such as Twitter and Telegram, which though banned in the country have been used by protesters. Police also confiscated the cellphones of protesters under arrest, according to two protesters who spoke to CNN.

A protester who was arrested over the weekend said they were told to hand over their phone and password to the police as "evidence." They said they feared police would export the data on their phone after it was confiscated by officers, who told them they could pick it up a week later. Another protester said police returned their phone upon their release, but officers had deleted the photo album and removed the WeChat social media app.

One protester told CNN they successfully avoided being contacted by the police as of Thursady afternoon.

During the demonstration, they'd kept their phone in airplane mode.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chinese Police are Using Cellphone Data to Track Down Protesters

Comments Filter:
  • by Miles_O'Toole ( 5152533 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @11:46AM (#63099112)

    China is currently creating the most oppressive tech-driven surveillance state the world has ever seen. Unfortunately, rather than viewing their terrifying experiment as a lesson on the dangers of failure to regard personal privacy as a right, Free World governments and their corporate owners see China as a blueprint.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I'm starting to think it's deliberate misdirection. By claiming China is doing it, the reader is lead to think that it is exceptional and something that the democracy they live in would never do.

        • by larryjoe ( 135075 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @03:23PM (#63099508)

          I'm starting to think it's deliberate misdirection. By claiming China is doing it, the reader is lead to think that it is exceptional and something that the democracy they live in would never do.

          Yes, the US is doing the exact same thing as China, but only in a simplistic binary view where either the police employ all surveillance methods or none at all. It's that nonsensical binary view that is not only incorrect but very misleading.

          This story about Chinese police involves methods that are rare in the US. Yes, the US government most definitely has wide surveillance, but most of this surveillance is in the background because open surveillance is embarrassing. It's this lack of embarrassment that allows the Chinese police to openly utilize surveillance techniques that would cause trouble for US police (due to pesky enforcement of police restrictions by the courts and the press). In fact, the Chinese police want the public to know about their willingness to openly use heavy-handed techniques as a further psychological extension of their power.

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            The US police don't seem embarrassed about asking Google for the personal information of everyone within a geographic area around the time a crime was suspected to have happened. That may be different to using cell tower data, but the end result is very similar.

            They primary difference seems to be which is the easiest option, not the level of comfort the police have with them.

            In both the US and Chinese cases, the justification is the same. It helps solve crime. I'm hoping that this at least makes more Chines

          • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            Yes, the techniques are similar. However, the results are different.

            In China, a dictatorship, one person controls it all, Judge, Jury, Executioner. That evidence they collect is only used to identify, at which point you're "disappeared" and gone forever. Your very existence is basically wiped - you never existed, no one knows who you are, etc. Basically a massive gaslighting campaign.

            In the US, there are checks and balances. The evidence may be used to identify you, yes, but then you have to be arraigned (b

      • Yes because in our democracies law enforcement never uses such tricks to track people :D

        They do, but there are legal limits on what they can do. The fact that those legal limits are too weak is a conscious choice by people who are voting in these democracies. The

        What's really a bad path is the increasing propaganda articles like this one on /.

        This is not a propaganda article. It's pretty clear simple factual article. The fact that this is happening in China makes it very different and much more significant fact than it would be otherwise. This shows the danger of systems like cellphones which were designed for European and American legal regimes in which people are protecte

      • by burni2 ( 1643061 )

        So basically you are stating that China's totalitarism and a democracy are one and the same thing?

        What can happen to protesters in China?
        What can happen to protesters in a democracy?

        The results speak for themself - just mentioning '89

        • Most '89 protesters simply dispersed and went home. Few of the student protesters were arrested and went to jail and get released afterwards. Some of the formal protesters are now working with the Chinese government, for example onf of their think tanks Canrong-Jin () was a student protester at Tiananmen in 1989. You probably never heard of that because your one-sided storyteller doesn't inform you about any of this.
      • In the US there are laws and rights to help the citizen from being surveilled. Governments and LEOâ(TM)s will always try to skirt such laws but at least we as citizens have legal recourses against the kind of tyranny. CCP allows for no such recourse for their citizens. They are treated as vassals of the state no better than cattle. China is assho.
    • by shanen ( 462549 )

      Nice FP, though I think you're projecting a bit much. Or maybe diverting? The technologies remain morally neutral, same as they ever were. It's up to us to figure out how we use them for good or bad purposes.

      Specific example in my mind these days involves the old MEPR idea, where my thinking has most recently evolved into how that technology could be used to evaluate my personal relationships. In what ways are certain relationships close and others more distant? How are my close relationships evolving over

      • "The technologies remain morally neutral" is correct, which tells us that as the original poster said, the problem is not the technologies, but the bad path that our governments have chosen. With Google's geofence [techcrunch.com], Western governments are doing the same thing that China is. And now that we know that Big Tech takes orders from government [nypost.com] things are getting dicey here. It is hard to want to trust big companies where the user is the product at all. I'm de-Googling, de-Appling, de-Microsofting, and de-Facebooki

      • Nice FP, though I think you're projecting a bit much. Or maybe diverting? The technologies remain morally neutral, same as they ever were. It's up to us to figure out how we use them for good or bad purposes.

        That's such a cop out. The technologies were specifically carefully designed with a power asymmetry so that they could be easily monitored by the authorities. End to end encryption in cellphone systems, done at the edge as the calls exited towards the PSTN would actually be easier than the current system which decrypts when the calls arrive at the network and then re-encrypts when they go back to a cellphone. There is no neutrality in that whatsoever.

        What we see here is that insecure technologies which were

        • by shanen ( 462549 )

          NAK

          Oh. Second time. So I must elaborate to avoid the "exact comment" thing?

          Then (per force?) let me accuse you of not understanding most of the words you are using. There is no sense in wasting time in such a discussion.

          If I cared, then I would ask where you obtained such a deficient education. But I don't.

        • End to end encryption will not save you. When it started being used more in Australia they just passed legislation in 2018 mandating that all new phones have backdoors.

          Their solution was to let people have end to end encryption, but to capture every single endpoint so it does not matter.

          • End to end encryption will not save you. When it started being used more in Australia they just passed legislation in 2018 mandating that all new phones have backdoors.

            Their solution was to let people have end to end encryption, but to capture every single endpoint so it does not matter.

            This situation is awful, but it's still better than having everything hard wired into the network. There are many ways it is better. A) since the thing happens on the local terminal and is a bit abnormal it is possible for journalists who realise that they are being spied on to investigate and prove it's happening B) it becomes possible to buy devices from elsewhere and use them instead of Australian bought devices C) you can build your own software (e.g. LineageOS) and use that.

            I'm not saying that this is

    • China is just honest about it.
      That's the only difference.

  • So, were the police using a US Stingray or some kind of Chinese knockoff? Is there any govt that doesn't use these tactics to discourage protesting these days?
    • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Saturday December 03, 2022 @11:56AM (#63099142) Homepage Journal

      They don't need any such thing. The government controls the telcos, they can just ask them for the location data.

    • The takeaway is airplane mode helps but is not necessarily risk free. So how can they organize anonymously? Leave your main cellphone off or at home. Reformatting NFC devices for mesh networks. But having one is suspicious. China might be infeasible but a lesson for democracy that freedom can be squashed.
      • by fazig ( 2909523 )
        Difficult situation, because if you're not happen to carry your tracking device around with you, that can already make you look suspicious.
        Because "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" rhetoric would have it that there can be no other explanation for you not carrying your tracker than you being up to something where carrying your tracker would be a bad idea.

        The future of retaining some degree of anonymity might be to hide in plain sight, perhaps with methods adjacent to chaffing and winnowing.
        • by kmoser ( 1469707 )
          I lost my phone. Have you seen it? Oh, lucky me, I found it when I got back home. It was there all along, haha!
          • by fazig ( 2909523 )
            Oh really? We made TikTok so you can't go without looking at your phone for more than 5 minutes. And it works.
            Now come with us, and don't resist.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Everywhere around the world they check cellphone data. Just like they did at the Capital.

    Another question, did these protestors come together adhoc/unprompted, but simply because they were all fed up with the covid restrictions, or was there more planning behind this. The fact reportedly vpns right are hard to connect to right now, but these protestors are connecting CNN sounds somewhat strange,

  • by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @12:03PM (#63099152)

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/... [townhall.com]

    VAUGHN: Hi, Mr. Cook. Do you support the Chinese people's right to protest?

    *TIM COOK SILENT*

    VAUGHN: Do you have any reaction to the factory workers that were beaten and detained for protesting COVID lockdowns?

    *TIM COOK SILENT*

    VAUGHN: Do you regret restricting AirDrop access that protesters used to evade surveillance from the Chinese government?

    *TIM COOK SILENT*

    VAUGHN: Do you think it's problematic to do business with the Communist Chinese Party when they suppress human rights?

    *TIM COOK SILENT*

    • Gee, you somehow forgot to mention she is a rightwing hatchet artist. Obviously just slipped your mind, such as it is.

      I'm looking forward to seeing her work on Putin's behalf so she can help destroy Ukraine and enslave whatever is left. /s

      Obviously not so much. But disclaimer needed? My own ancestors were refugees who fled dictators.

      • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @12:35PM (#63099202) Homepage

        Quite literally attacking the messenger.

        How does her identity invalidate her questions?

        • by shanen ( 462549 )

          NAK

          Again? How soon I forget. So what should I add?

          Does defending sophism make you a Sophist? Just asking for a friend.

      • Liars all around (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @12:52PM (#63099232) Homepage Journal

        Gee, you somehow forgot to mention she is a rightwing hatchet artist. Obviously just slipped your mind, such as it is.

        I'm looking forward to seeing her work on Putin's behalf so she can help destroy Ukraine and enslave whatever is left. /s

        Obviously not so much. But disclaimer needed? My own ancestors were refugees who fled dictators.

        Let's completely avoid discussion about the issues and focus on the journalist asking questions. She's completely rightwing, you know, and that makes all the issues about Apple OK.

        Let's also forget that ESG is a thing, liberals claim to care about governance and social issues, companies are rated by their ESG rating, and companies are regularly boycotted by liberals for social offenses, but somehow not Apple for doing this.

        Let's focus on the real issues here.

        The feature "AirDrop" was restricted by pushing an update, the update didn't state that this (the restriction) would happen, and the restriction happened only for phones in mainline China. This wasn't a mistake, happened on purpose, and directly hobbled protests against human rights violations in an authoritarian regime.

        From previous Slashdot story:

        That changed on Nov. 9, when Apple released a new version of its mobile operating system, iOS 16.1.1, to customers worldwide. Rather than listing new features, as it often does, the company simply said, "This update includes bug fixes and security updates and is recommended for all users." Hidden in the update was a change that only applies to iPhones sold in mainland China: AirDrop can only be set to receive messages from everyone for 10 minutes, before switching off. There's no longer a way to keep the "everyone" setting on permanently on Chinese iPhones.

        The change, first noticed by Chinese readers of 9to5Mac, doesn't apply anywhere else.

    • Silence is what you get when you dont ask apple approved questions
    • I mean, it’s a random reporter accosting him with unplanned questions in the halls of the Capitol as he’s walking between meetings with members of Congress. It would have been more of a story if he actually said anything.

  • There are many things that I don't understand.

    To be anonymous is possible, when we don't use standard communication mechanisms (services, machines). With so many electronic parts, or even non electronic mechanisms around, why not to avoid the situation? In fact these white leaves of paper are "pure genius".

    The problem is that we believe that the phone is part of our life, when it is just a machine as a coffee maker or a TV are. In fact, we were able to survive for thousands of years without phones,

    • I think these people have a point in bringing their phones. They need to be present at the right street the right moment and need to know if they need to go away quickly, also they probably want to take videos and maybe smuggle it outside China. A walkie-talkie or a picture camera might be suspicious to the Chinese police. The mobile phone is the only device that s not suspicious from the principle.

      What these people need is ways to use mesh networks so they can communicate without the cell network (the poli

      • Some people's phones are being confiscated, this could well mean that they plan to image them, and then they can subject them to deep inspection at their leisure. And just having a phone with those capabilities is probably a crime...

        • by malvcr ( 2932649 )

          This bring another question: what is communication?

          The white piece of paper "is" communication, as it can deliver a message. But it is far from being the only way people can interchange thoughts and opinions.

          The problem with the current smartphone technology and the Internet, is that they are forcing us to standardize the way we share information in such a way that the information be easy to eavesdrop and/or manipulate. We even could argue that this is on purpose, to drive people to believe that the

  • I think many governments use cell phone data to track criminals. I would have been amazed if they didn't do this
  • Coming soon to a communist party near you
  • Freedom of speech (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @12:33PM (#63099198) Homepage
    Every generation has to learn this same lesson [fee.org], and it's hard every time. Freedom of speech is painful and messy, but we have it for a reason. Yes it sucks that people can say factually untrue things and the government won't stop them. But there is no magical group of unbiased fairies that know the whole truth, only a few groups that think they do. Better to live with fake news than hand over control of what you hear to the government. Oh, and letting unregulated private organizations decide what's true (like social media and cable news) is just as dumb. At least broadcast news used to be pseudo-regulated by the fairness doctrine. We lost something valuable when we gave that up.
    • Better to live with fake news ...

      Heard of a little thing called "January 6th"? That's when a group of 'patriots' (usually meaning 'my rules are more valuable than your rules') decided the news of a "stolen election" was more valuable than reports that the election is verified as a reasonably accurate summary of the people's will.

      Fake news is bad: The problem is, explaining how every sentence is dishonest and manipulative, is time-consuming. That's time, people outraged by fake news don't want to spend on the truth.

      ... control of what you hear, to the government.

      Once again, American

      • by RobinH ( 124750 )
        Look, over 80% of Americans believe in God, and it doesn't matter how many facts you put in front of them... it's not going to change. We don't live in a reality where the majority of people are swayed by solid and rigorous fact checking, or reasoning, or science, or logic. There's a small minority of people that live and die by rigorous logic, and they're allowed to exist in this world because they're generally useful to everyone else because they seem to make a lot of cool gadgets. But make no mistake,
  • by PhantomHarlock ( 189617 ) on Saturday December 03, 2022 @12:34PM (#63099200)

    It would actually be less suspicious to leave the phone on but at your home rather than to place it in airplane mode. Although they are not likely searching for phones that suddenly stopped pinging in the wider area rather than just a geolocation report, but I wouldn't put it past them to do that if they wanted to be very thorough.

    The main issue is that they also have cameras and facial recognition, which still requires additional steps to frustrate. The fact that they are protesting in such large numbers is the biggest help. Once it reaches a tipping point, individual safety actually increases.

    • I am thinking of running a service during protests where for a small fee I take your phone on a leisurely drive far away from the events in question, stopping at multiple restaurants, bars, and convenience stores which do not have working CCTV. "Junk seeding" or inserting bad data is a good way to avoid governments that have put on the elbow gloves and taken out the flashlight.

      • To anyone under 30 years old. Just does not compute.

        What if someone needs to urgently send them an instagram picture? The horror of it.

        Here and in China I suspect.

        Also very suspicious in China not to be carrying a phone. I think they make it mandatory for the Uighurs.

      • by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

        I am thinking of running a service during protests where for a small fee I take your phone on a leisurely drive far away from the events in question, stopping at multiple restaurants, bars, and convenience stores which do not have working CCTV. "Junk seeding" or inserting bad data is a good way to avoid governments that have put on the elbow gloves and taken out the flashlight.

        Then at the police station - we have 7,000 phones that at the same time were driving on the same roads and going to the same Italian Pizza joint. Then driving at the same time over here. Wonder if it's related.

  • except not so much going after protestors, but resisters of invasion.

    Israel tended to assassinate, US tended to drop a bomb on the signal.

  • CNN here in Brazil calls the government transition constitutional law (called "PEC": "projeto de emenda constitucional") of "PEC do Estouro" ("law of the break" or "law of the financial irresponsibility"), fomenting/stimulating the Market Terrorism occurring here...

    * they like to use the tagline: "CNN, leader of freedom" - the proper nickname of CNNBrasil, in my view, "CNN, leader of freedom OF THE MARKET"
    • The russofobic and sinofobic news in CNN (but almost nothing negative about Saudi Arabia, for example) grabs my attention to
  • They bought the data from Facebook. The only difference between China and America here is we're calling out China and they didn't have to pay for the data.

    Having a militarized police force is bad, m'kay.
  • apple needs to take an stand and get out! Don't cave in! at the very least open up side loading so they can wash there hands over any banned apps.

  • Every Chinese citizen must know by now their every movement and action is tracked. Why are they being so stupid as to take their cellphones to a protest? Oh yeah! They do that in the US, too. Forest Gump: "Stupid is as stupid does1"
  • When you report to the police station to sign your confession, you will be asked to identify a number of co-conspirators. Whether or not you actually know any of them, you will have to report someone.

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Working...