Mobile phone from the 1990s making a comeback as Nokia 8210 proves popular for drug d

What puzzles me is that with a smartphone you could use OTR messaging, also you can encrypt the device against being seized.

Balancing that out it would be fairly trivial using Bluetooth, GPS and Wifi to trace where the phone was.

So is this a case of just making sure that the phone's location is harder to trace? It's just the way I see it it would be easier to monitor call records and text from an older style phone whereas it would be much more difficult to intercept an encrypted conversation with OTR done over Jabber for instance?

lickme wrote: »

Use 2g signal. Harder to pin point exact locations. No Google location services. Forensic analysts can get feck all data from the phone like location etc. Sums it up really. Be stupid not to use an older phone.

I suppose it would be harder to pinpoint an exact location. I suppose my worry for a Nokia phone would be that there's no way to protect your text messages and of course your calls can be monitored.

Get a 50 Euro Android phone and have a VOIP encrypted call or exchange messages over OTR, you can keep your conversation private but at the expense that it's easier to pinpoint where your phone is located.

As always I suppose it depends on your threat model. If you're known to the Police already as a drug dealer, you don't want any evidence placing you near the scene of the crime, although I still don't think there's much advantage in having a Nokia phone over a smartphone as you can still be located.