"As a company that has access to confidential data, they are responsible for the privacy of everyone using the mobile telephone system."
Except that late in the last century, we (in the USA) lost ownership of our calling metadata. Thanks to one of those telecom bills, it belongs to the phone company. And IIRC, that was tested in court. And we (the public) lost.
From TFA: "This practice skirts wires carriers’ legal obligation to be the sole conduit by which the government conducts surveillance...".
But that is a restriction on the behavior of government, not the carriers or their customers (Securus, for example). Law enforcement might be obliged to serve warrants directly to AT&T or Verizon for _THEIR_ data. But there is nothing stopping these telecoms from selling _THEIR_ property to third parties. It's up to our government (police, department of corrections, etc.) to abide by the law and our Constitution (specifically the Fourth Amendment). But given their recent actions surrounding commercially available genealogical DNA data, That's a tempting cookie jar on an easy to reach shelf. Undoubtedly, law enforcement will argue that their recent solution to the Golden State Killer justifies unrestricted access. But the question remains as to whether police can use front companies to accumulate evidence against a person without a warrant.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
