- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Privacy stalwart Nicholas Merrill spent a decade fighting an FBI surveillance order. Now he wants to sell you phone serviceāwithout knowing almost anything about you.
Nicholas Merrill has spent his career fighting government surveillance. But he would really rather you didnāt call what heās selling now a āburner phone.ā
Yes, he dreams of a future where anyone in the US can get a working smartphoneācomplete with cellular coverage and dataāwithout revealing their identity, even to the phone company. But to call such anonymous phones āburnersā suggests that theyāre for something illegal, shady, or at least subversive. The term calls to mind drug dealers or deep-throat confidential sources in parking garages.
With his new startup, Merrill says he instead wants to offer cellular service for your existing phone that makes near-total mobile privacy the permanent, boring default of daily life in the US. āWeāre not looking to cater to people doing bad things,ā says Merrill. āWeāre trying to help people feel more comfortable living their normal lives, where theyāre not doing anything wrong, and not feel watched and exploited by giant surveillance and data mining operations. I think itās not controversial to say the vast majority of people want that.ā
Thatās the thinking behind Phreeli, the phone carrier startup Merrill launched today, designed to be the most privacy-focused cellular provider available to Americans. Phreeli, as in, āspeak freely,ā aims to give its user a different sort of privacy from the kind that can be had with end-to-end encrypted texting and calling tools like Signal or WhatsApp. Those apps hide the content of conversations, or even, in Signalās case, metadata like the identities of who is talking to whom. Phreeli instead wants to offer actual anonymity. It canāt help government agencies or data brokers obtain usersā identifying information because it has almost none to share. The only piece of information the company records about its users when they sign up for a Phreeli phone number is, in fact, a mere ZIP code. Thatās the minimum personal data Merrill has determined his company is legally required to keep about its customers for tax purposes.
By asking users for almost no identifiable information, Merrill wants to protect them from one of the most intractable privacy problems in modern technology: Despite whatever surveillance-resistant communications apps you might use, phone carriers will always know which of their customersā phones are connecting to which cell towers and when. Carriers have frequently handed that information over to data brokers willing to pay for itāor any FBI or ICE agent that demands it with a court order
Merrill has some firsthand experience with those demands. Starting in 2004, he fought a landmark, decade-plus legal battle against the FBI and the Department of Justice. As the owner of an internet service provider in the post-9/11 era, Merrill had received a secret order from the bureau to hand over data on a particular userāand he refused. After that, he spent another 15 years building and managing the Calyx Institute, a nonprofit that offers privacy tools like a snooping-resistant version of Android and a free VPN that collects no logs of its usersā activities. āNick is somebody who is extremely principled and willing to take a stand for his principles,ā says Cindy Cohn, who as executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation has led the groupās own decades-long fight against government surveillance. āHeās careful and thoughtful, but also, at a certain level, kind of fearless.ā
Nicholas Merrill with a copy of the National Security Letter he received from the FBI in 2004, ordering him to give up data on one of his customers. He refused, fought a decade-plus court battleāand won.
More recently, Merrill began to realize he had a chance to achieve a win against surveillance at a more fundamental level: by becoming the phone company. āI started to realize that if I controlled the mobile provider, there would be even more opportunities to create privacy for people,ā Merrill says. āIf we were able to set up our own network of cell towers globally, we can set the privacy policies of what those towers see and collect.ā
Building or buying cell towers across the US for billions of dollars, of course, was not within the budget of Merrillās dozen-person startup. So heās created the next best thing: a so-called mobile virtual network operator, or MVNO, a kind of virtual phone carrier that pays one of the big, established onesāin Phreeliās case, T-Mobileāto use its infrastructure.
The result is something like a cellular prophylactic. The towers are T-Mobileās, but the contracts with usersāand the decisions about what private data to require from themāare Phreeliās. āYou canāt control the towers. But what can you do?ā he says. āYou can separate the personally identifiable information of a person from their activities on the phone system.ā
Signing up a customer for phone service without knowing their name is, surprisingly, legal in all 50 states, Merrill says. Anonymously accepting money from usersāwith payment options other than envelopes of cashāpresents more technical challenges. To that end, Phreeli has implemented a new encryption system it calls Double-Blind Armadillo, based on cutting-edge cryptographic protocols known as zero-knowledge proofs. Through a kind of mathematical sleight of hand, those crypto functions are capable of tasks like confirming that a certain phone has had its monthly service paid for, but without keeping any record that links a specific credit card number to that phone. Phreeli users can also pay their bills (or rather, prepay them, since Phreeli has no way to track down anonymous users who owe them money) with tough-to-trace cryptocurrency like Zcash or Monero.
Phreeli users can, however, choose to set their own dials for secrecy versus convenience. If they offer an email address at signup, they can more easily recover their account if their phone is lost. To get a SIM card, they can give their mailing addressāwhich Merrill says Phreeli will promptly delete after the SIM shipsāor they can download the digital equivalent known as an eSIM, even, if they choose, from a site Phreeli will host on the Tor anonymity network.
Phreeliās āarmadilloā analogyāthe animal also serves as the mascot in its logoāis meant to capture this sliding scale of privacy that Phreeli offers its users: Armadillos always have a layer of armor, but they can choose whether to expose their vulnerable underbelly or curl into a fully protected ball.
Even if users choose the less paranoid side of that spectrum of options, Merrill argues, his company will still be significantly less surveillance-friendly than existing phone companies, which have long represented one of the weakest links in the tech worldās privacy protections. All major US cellular carriers comply, for instance, with law enforcement surveillance orders like ātower dumpsā that hand over data to the government on every phone that connected to a particular cell tower during a certain time. Theyāve also happily, repeatedly handed over your data to corporate interests: Last year the Federal Communications Commission fined AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile nearly $200 million for selling usersā personal information, including their locations, to data brokers. (AT&Tās fine was later overturned by an appeals court ruling intended to limit the FCCās enforcement powers.) Many data brokers in turn sell the information to federal agencies, including ICE and other parts of the DHS, offering an all-too-easy end run around restrictions on those agenciesā domestic spying.
Phreeli doesnāt promise to be a surveillance panacea. Even if your cellular carrier isnāt tying your movements to your identity, the operating system of whatever phone you sign up with might be. Even your mobile apps can track you.
But for a startup seeking to be the countryās most privacy-focused mobile carrier, the bar is low. āThe goal of this phone company Iām starting is to be more private than the three biggest phone carriers in the US. Thatās the promise weāre going to massively overdeliver on,ā says Merrill. āI donāt think thereās any way we can mess that up.ā
Merrillās not-entirely-voluntary decision to spend the last 20-plus years as a privacy diehard began with three pages of paper that arrived at his office on a February day in New York in 2004. An FBI agent knocked on the door of his small internet service provider firm called Calyx, headquartered in a warehouse space a block from the Holland Tunnel in Manhattan. When Merrill answered, he found an older man with parted white hair, dressed in a trench coat like a comic book G-man, who handed him an envelope.
Merrill opened it and read the letter while the agent waited. The first and second paragraphs told him he was hereby ordered to hand over virtually all information he possessed for one of his customers, identified by their email address, explaining that this demand was authorized by a law heād later learn was part of the Patriot Act. The third paragraph informed him he couldnāt tell anyone heād even received this letterāa gag order.
Then the agent departed without answering any of Merrillās questions. He was left to decide what to do, entirely alone.
Merrill was struck immediately by the fact that the letter had no signature from a judge. He had in fact been handed a so-called National Security Letter, or NSL, a rarely seen and highly controversial tool of the Bush administration that allowed the FBI to demand information without a warrant, so long as it was related to ānational security.ā
Calyxās actual business, since heād first launched the company in the early ā90s with a bank of modems in the nonfunctional fireplace of a New York apartment, had evolved into hosting the websites of big corporate customers like Mitsubishi and Ikea. But Merrill used that revenue stream to give pro bono or subsidized web hosting to nonprofit clients he supported like the Marijuana Policy Project and Indymediaāand to offer fast internet connections to a few friends and acquaintances like the one named in this surveillance order.
Merrill has never publicly revealed the identity of the NSLās target, and he declined to share it with WIRED. But he knew this particular customer, and he certainly didnāt strike Merrill as a national security threat. If he were, Merrill thought, why not just get a warrant? The customer would later tell Merrill he had in fact been pressured by the FBI to become an informantāand had refused. The bureau, he told Merrill, had then retaliated by putting him on the no-fly list and pressuring employers not to hire him. (The FBI didnāt respond to WIREDās request for comment on the case.)
Merrill immediately decided to risk disobeying the gag orderāon pain of what consequences, he had no ideaāand called his lawyer, who told him to go to the New York affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, which happened to be one of Calyxās web-hosting clients. After a few minutes in a cab, Merrill was talking to a young attorney named Jameel Jaffer in the ACLUās Financial District office. āI wish I could say that we reassured him with our expertise on the NSL statute, but thatās not how it went down,ā Jaffer says. āWe had never seen one of these before.ā
Merrill, meanwhile, knew that every lawyer he showed the letter to might represent another count in his impending prosecution. āI was terrified,ā he says. āI kind of assumed someone could just come to my place that night, throw a hood over my head, and drag me away.ā Phreeli will use a novel encryption system called DoubleBlind Armadilloābased on cutting edge crypto protocols known asā¦
Phreeli will use a novel encryption system called Double-Blind Armadilloābased on cutting edge crypto protocols known as zero-knowledge proofsāto pull of tricks like accepting credit card payments from customers without keeping any record that ties that payment information to their particular phone.
Despite his fears, Merrill never complied with the FBIās letter. Instead, he decided to fight its constitutionality in court, with the help of pro bono representation from the ACLU and later the Yale Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic. That fight would last 11 years and entirely commandeer his life.
Merrill and his lawyers argued that the NSL represented an unconstitutional search and a violation of his free-speech rightsāand they won. But Congress only amended the NSL statute, leaving the provision about its gag order intact, and the legal battle dragged out for years longer. Even after the NSL was rescinded altogether, Merrill continued to fight for the right to talk about its existence. āThis was a time when so many people in his position were essentially cowering under their desks. But he felt an obligation as a citizen to speak out about surveillance powers that he thought had gone too far,ā says Jaffer, who represented Merrill for the first six years of that courtroom war. āHe impressed me with his courage.ā
Battling the FBI took over Merrillās life to the degree that he eventually shut down his ISP for lack of time or will to run the business and instead took a series of IT jobs. āI felt too much weight on my shoulders,ā he says. āI was just constantly on the phone with lawyers, and I was scared all the time.ā
By 2010, Merrill had won the right to publicly name himself as the NSLās recipient. By 2015 heād beaten the gag order entirely and released the full letter with only the targetās name redacted. But Merrill and the ACLU never got the Supreme Court precedent they wanted from the case. Instead, the Patriot Act itself was amended to reign in NSLsā unconstitutional powers.
In the meantime, those years of endless bureaucratic legal struggles had left Merrill disillusioned with judicial or even legislative action as a way to protect privacy. Instead, he decided to try a different approach. āThe third way to fight surveillance is with technology,ā he says. āThat was my big realization.ā
So, just after Merrill won the legal right to go public with his NSL battle in 2010, he founded the Calyx Institute, a nonprofit that shared a name with his old ISP but was instead focused on building free privacy tools and services. The privacy-focused version of Googleās Android OS it would develop, designed to strip out data-tracking tools and use Signal by default for calls and texts, would eventually have close to 100,000 users. It ran servers for anonymous, encrypted instant messaging over the chat protocol XMPP with around 300,000 users. The institute also offered a VPN service and ran servers that comprised part of the volunteer-based Tor anonymity network, tools that Merrill estimates were used by millions.
As he became a cause cĆ©lĆØbre and then a standout activist in the digital privacy world over those years, Merrill says he started to become aware of the growing problem of untrustworthy cellular providers in an increasingly phone-dependent world. Heād sometimes come across anti-surveillance hard-liners determined to avoid giving any personal information to cellular carriers, who bought SIM cards with cash and signed up for prepaid plans with false names. Some even avoided cell service altogether, using phones they connected only to Wi-Fi. āEventually those people never got invites to any parties,ā Merrill says.
All these schemes, he knew, were legal enough. So why not a phone company that only collects minimal personal informationāor noneāfrom its normal, non-extremist customers? As early as 2019, he had already consulted with lawyers and incorporated Phreeli as a company. He decided on the for-profit startup route after learning that the 501c3 statute canāt apply to a telecom firm. Only last year, he finally raised $5 million, mostly from one angel investor. (Merrill declined to name the person. Naturally, they value their privacy.)
Building a system that could function like a normal phone companyāand accept usersā payments like oneāwithout storing virtually any identifying information on those customers presented a distinct challenge. To solve it, Merrill consulted with Zooko Wilcox, one of the creators of Zcash, perhaps the closest thing in the world to actual anonymous cryptocurrency. The Z in Zcash stands for āzero-knowledge proofs,ā a relatively new form of crypto system that has allowed Zcashās users to prove things (like who has paid whom) while keeping all information (like their identities, or even the amount of payments) fully encrypted.
For Phreeli, Wilcox suggested a related but slightly different system: so-called āzero-knowledge access passes.ā Wilcox compares the system to people showing their driverās license at the door of a club. āYouāve got to give your home address to the bouncer,ā Wilcox says incredulously. The magical properties of zero knowledge proofs, he says, would allow you to generate an unforgeable crypto credential that proves youāre over 21 and then show that to the doorman without revealing your name, address, or even your age. āA process that previously required identification gets replaced by something that only requires authorization,ā Wilcox says. āSee the difference?ā
The same trick will now let Phreeli users prove theyāve prepaid their phone bill without connecting their name, address, or any payment information to their phone recordsāeven if they pay with a credit card. The result, Merrill says, will be a user experience for most customers thatās not very different from their existing phone carrier, but with a radically different level of data collection.
As for Wilcox, heās long been one of that small group of privacy zealots who buys his SIM cards in cash with a fake name. But he hopes Phreeli will offer an easier pathānot just for people like him, but for normies too.
āI donāt know of anybody whoās ever offered this credibly before,ā says Wilcox. āNot the usual telecom-strip-mining-your-data phone, not a black-hoodie hacker phone, but a privacy-is-normal phone.ā
Even so, enough tech companies have pitched privacy as a feature for their commercial product that jaded consumers may not buy into a for-profit telecom like Phreeli purporting to offer anonymity. But the EFFās Cohn says that Merrillās track record shows heās not just using the fight against surveillance as a marketing gimmick to sell something. āHaving watched Nick for a long time, itās all a means to an end for him,ā she says. āAnd the end is privacy for everyone.ā
Merrill may not like the implications of describing Phreeli as a cellular carrier where every phone is a burner phone. But thereās little doubt that some of the companyās customers will use its privacy protections for crimeājust as with every surveillance-resistant tool, from Signal to Tor to briefcases of cash.
Phreeli wonāt, at least, offer a platform for spammers and robocallers, Merrill says. Even without knowing usersā identities, he says the company will block that kind of bad behavior by limiting how many calls and texts users are allowed, and banning users who appear to be gaming the system. āIf people think this is going to be a safe haven for abusing the phone network, thatās not going to work,ā Merrill says.
But some customers of his phone company will, to Merrillās regret, do bad things, he saysājust as they sometimes used to with pay phones, that anonymous, cash-based phone service that once existed on every block of American cities. āYou put a quarter in, you didnāt need to identify yourself, and you could call whoever you wanted,ā he reminisces. āAnd 99.9 percent of the time, people werenāt doing bad stuff.ā The small minority who were, he argues, didnāt justify the involuntary societal slide into the cellular panopticon we all live in today, where a phone call not tied to freely traded data on the callerās identity is a rare phenomenon.
āThe pendulum has swung so far in favor of total information awareness,ā says Merrill, using an intelligence term of the Bush administration whose surveillance order set him on this path 21 years ago. āThings that we used to be able to take for granted have slipped through our fingers.ā
āOther phone companies are selling an apartment that comes with no curtainsāwhere the windows are incompatible with curtains,ā Merrill says. āWeāre trying to say, no, curtains are normal. Privacy is normal.ā



Iāve bought and activated several prepaid phones over the years, paid cash, obviously pseudonymous name, no ID. Last was several years ago, idk if you can still do that. When I did it, it was at phone stores and they told me it was ok.
That said, phones will never be private. Thereās too much tracking and logging. People canāt accept that, because they love their phones too much. But you have to make a choice. Anonymous carriers are of almost no help because all the stuff about deanonymizing database records applies even more to phones. At best they help stay away from some marketing crap and stuff on that level. Government surveillance will see right through it.
Prepaid sims exist, no?
Its still possible some places, but a lot of stores have cracked down on it
Itās not possible in any corporate stores purely for the fact that they use facial recognition extensively. Doesnāt matter if you can technically get away with paying cash and using a fake name. Youāre being tracked the moment their cameras can see you and they have extensive profiles on people even if youāve never used a debit card, given them an email, or given them a phone number.
Also, the ones Iāve seen in stores lately hare only the trial offers that are only good for a couple days and have to be āreplenishedā with an online account to stay functional for more than a couple days. Mint wouldnāt even activate initially with an email alias. I called support and they said āwe canāt activate it with that email, we need your real email.ā I then told them no worries, Iād just return it to best buy. Then they āfound a wayā to activate it, but I would have needed to give a credit card if I wanted it to stay active more than the 3 days. Best buy didnāt carry any longer duration prepaid card in the stores.