YOU ARE AT:Archived ArticlesHouse committee presses FCC for carriers' security policies

House committee presses FCC for carriers’ security policies

WASHINGTON-The House Commerce Committee began its investigation into the data brokering of cell-phone records by requesting that the Federal Communications Commission turn over information on how wireless carriers are protecting their customer call records.

“In the recent cases involving the online sale of telephone records, the apparent ease with which such personal information has been compromised, obtained, and then sold, is shocking and unacceptable,” the House Commerce telecommunications subcommittee leadership wrote to the FCC. “As part of our ongoing investigation of this issue, as well as the FCC’s response to consumer-privacy concerns, we request that you forward to us the last annual certifications the commission has received from the five largest wireline telecommunications carriers and the five largest wireless telecommunications carriers, along with the accompanying statements from each company explaining how their internal procedures protect the confidentiality of consumer information.”

Each year carriers must certify that they are protecting customer proprietary network information (CPNI). However, the certifications are not filed with the FCC; instead each carrier must make it available upon request, said David Fiske, director of the FCC’s Office of Media Relations.

Therefore, the FCC will now have to get the certifications from the carriers in order to respond to the House committee’s request.

RCR Wireless News first reported on Cingular Wireless L.L.C.’s CPNI certification for 2004. In its filing, Cingular said that all employees who have access to customer data, have outbound marketing responsibilities or are officers of the company completed privacy training by March 2003. The carrier noted that any employee who violates Cingular’s privacy policies faces disciplinary action, including possible termination. Cingular’s certification for 2005 has not yet been filed.

The other nationwide carriers did not respond to requests for their certifications.

The issue recently gained prominence following a CBS Evening News broadcast critical of the wireless industry and the apparent theft and sale of users’ call records. The CBS story came out shortly after an Internet blogger managed to buy the cell-phone records of retired Army General Wesley Clark.

Legislators, the FCC and others have since swarmed over the issue.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) recently introduced legislation to criminalize pretexting-impersonating a customer to obtain call records. Indeed, General Clark appeared on the Senate side of Capitol Hill to urge passage of Schumer’s bill.

“I never thought I would be up here as a victim of cell-phone record theft,” said General Clark. “They just don’t have any right to this information.”

While Schumer’s bill, known as the Consumer Telephone Records Protection Act of 2006, is the only one to be so far introduced, other senators have expressed interest in solving this issue. Schumer’s bill, which has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, is the toughest so far, he said, adding he would work with anyone who wants to solve the problem. Schumer said both the Judiciary and Commerce Committees have jurisdiction over the topic.

Both Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile USA Inc. appeared at the Schumer/Clark press conference. Both companies filed separate lawsuits against online data brokers they believe are obtaining and selling customer call records.

Meanwhile, Cingular announced it received another restraining order against a data broker; this time eFindOutTheTruth.com.

“Data brokers should know that Cingular will persist in its aggressive fight to protect customer privacy. We will continue this battle in the courts, by working with law enforcement, and by supporting the enactment of tough new laws that put an end to cell-phone records ripoffs,” said Joaquin Carbonell, Cingular’s executive vice president and general counsel.

Cingular obtained a similar restraining order Jan. 13 against locatecell.com.

ABOUT AUTHOR