Posted January 6, 2015 7:40 PM ET; Last updated March 23, 2015 9:23 PM ET
[From article]
A powerful bipartisan pair of senators is pressing the Obama administration over the development of spy tools that mimic cell towers in order to track people’s cellphones.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chick Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder noting that they have “additional concerns” about the tools, which were reportedly developed by the CIA. The letter was sent last week but revealed to the public on Monday.
[. . .]
The CIA’s role in the development of the technology was unknown until a Wall Street Journal story earlier this month. The spy agency’s role in the program is unusual, given that it is largely banned from domestic spying.
http://thehill.com/policy/technology/236646-senators-raise-new-concerns-about-cia-aided-cellphone-tracking
Senators raise new concerns about CIA-aided cellphone tracking
By Julian Hattem
03/23/15 03:34 PM EDT
* * *
[From article]
Since 2005, the department has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on cell-site simulators manufactured by the Harris Corp. in Melbourne, Florida, records show. The devices — with names like StingRay and KingFish — capture cellphone signals.
Cops can use the technology, originally developed for the military, to locate cellphones. Police agencies in other states have revealed in court that StingRays and similar devices have been used to locate suspects, fugitives and victims in criminal investigations.
But privacy activists across the country have begun to question whether law enforcement agencies have used the devices to track people involved in demonstrations in violation of their constitutional rights. They also have concerns the technology scoops up the phone data of innocent citizens and police targets alike.
The Chicago Police Department uses the devices in investigations of kidnappings, murders and other serious crimes, police sources say.
[. . .]
“Surveillance like this has a chilling effect on free speech and dissent, especially when considered in light of the history of illegal political surveillance by the Chicago Police Department and misconduct that has led to far too many false convictions,” Topic said. “People are less willing to speak out against government corruption and wrongdoing when they fear that government is monitoring their location, their associations and their speech.
[. . .]
Information about how the trackers are used is protected under various federal laws, according to the city. Court orders for the police to use the systems for investigations have been placed under seal, the city said. And Harris Corp. required the police department to keep details about the devices under wraps, the city says.
[. . .]
Last week, a judge in New York ruled in a lawsuit brought by the New York Civil Liberties Union that the Erie County, New York, Sheriff’s office must turn over documents about specific cases in which StingRays were used there. The judge rejected the sheriff’s argument that federal laws exempt the reports from disclosure. In particular, he said the sheriff there must provide records of how the devices were used to track a missing person and a suicidal person.
[. . .]
In the state of Washington, the legislature is considering a bill that would regulate police department’s use of the technology.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/451304/chicago-police-fighting-keep-cellphone-trackers-secret
Chicago Police fighting to keep cellphone trackers secret
Posted: 03/22/2015, 09:04pm
Frank Main
* * *
[From article]
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking the position that court warrants are not required when deploying cell-site simulators in public places. Nicknamed "stingrays," the devices are decoy cell towers that capture locations and identities of mobile phone users and can intercept calls and texts.
The FBI made its position known during private briefings with staff members of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). In response, the two lawmakers wrote Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson, maintaining they were "concerned about whether the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have adequately considered the privacy interests" of Americans.
[. . .]
The letter was prompted in part by a Wall Street Journal report in November that said the Justice Department was deploying small airplanes equipped with cell-site simulators that enabled "investigators to scoop data from tens of thousands of cellphones in a single flight, collecting their identifying information and general location."
The bureau's position on Americans' privacy isn't surprising. The Obama Administration has repeatedly maintained that the public has no privacy in public places. It began making that argument as early as 2010, when it told a federal appeals court that the authorities should be allowed to affix GPS devices on vehicles and track a suspect's every move without court authorization. The Supreme Court, however, eventually ruled that warrants are required. What's more, the administration has argued that placing a webcam with pan-and-zoom capabilities on a utility pole to spy on a suspect at his or her residence was no different from a police officer's observation from the public right-of-way. A federal judge last month disagreed with the government's position, tossing evidence gathered by the webcam that was operated from afar.
[. . .]
The Harris Corp., a maker of the devices from Florida, includes non-disclosure clauses with buyers. Baltimore authorities cited a non-disclosure agreement to a judge in November as their grounds for refusing to say how they tracked a suspect's mobile phone. They eventually dropped charges rather than disclose their techniques. Further, sometimes the authorities simply lie to judges about their use or undertake other underhanded methods to prevent the public from knowing that the cell-site simulators are being used.
[. . .]
"In Tacoma, judges now require police (to) specifically note they plan to use an IMSI catcher and promise not to store data collected from people who are not investigation targets," he said. "The Florida and Massachusetts state supreme courts ruled warrants were necessary for real-time cell phone tracking. Nine states—Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin—passed laws specifically requiring police to use a warrant to track a cell phone in real time."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/fbi-says-search-warrants-not-needed-to-use-stringrays-in-public-places/
FBI says search warrants not needed to use “stingrays” in public places
Feds' position on decoy cell-site towers continues anti-privacy theme.
by David Kravets
Jan 5 2015, 2:25pm EST
Cops can use the technology, originally developed for the military, to locate cellphones. Police agencies in other states have revealed in court that StingRays and similar devices have been used to locate suspects, fugitives and victims in criminal investigations.
But privacy activists across the country have begun to question whether law enforcement agencies have used the devices to track people involved in demonstrations in violation of their constitutional rights. They also have concerns the technology scoops up the phone data of innocent citizens and police targets alike.
The Chicago Police Department uses the devices in investigations of kidnappings, murders and other serious crimes, police sources say.
[. . .]
“Surveillance like this has a chilling effect on free speech and dissent, especially when considered in light of the history of illegal political surveillance by the Chicago Police Department and misconduct that has led to far too many false convictions,” Topic said. “People are less willing to speak out against government corruption and wrongdoing when they fear that government is monitoring their location, their associations and their speech.
[. . .]
Information about how the trackers are used is protected under various federal laws, according to the city. Court orders for the police to use the systems for investigations have been placed under seal, the city said. And Harris Corp. required the police department to keep details about the devices under wraps, the city says.
[. . .]
Last week, a judge in New York ruled in a lawsuit brought by the New York Civil Liberties Union that the Erie County, New York, Sheriff’s office must turn over documents about specific cases in which StingRays were used there. The judge rejected the sheriff’s argument that federal laws exempt the reports from disclosure. In particular, he said the sheriff there must provide records of how the devices were used to track a missing person and a suicidal person.
[. . .]
In the state of Washington, the legislature is considering a bill that would regulate police department’s use of the technology.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/451304/chicago-police-fighting-keep-cellphone-trackers-secret
Chicago Police fighting to keep cellphone trackers secret
Posted: 03/22/2015, 09:04pm
Frank Main
* * *
[From article]
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking the position that court warrants are not required when deploying cell-site simulators in public places. Nicknamed "stingrays," the devices are decoy cell towers that capture locations and identities of mobile phone users and can intercept calls and texts.
The FBI made its position known during private briefings with staff members of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). In response, the two lawmakers wrote Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson, maintaining they were "concerned about whether the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have adequately considered the privacy interests" of Americans.
[. . .]
The letter was prompted in part by a Wall Street Journal report in November that said the Justice Department was deploying small airplanes equipped with cell-site simulators that enabled "investigators to scoop data from tens of thousands of cellphones in a single flight, collecting their identifying information and general location."
The bureau's position on Americans' privacy isn't surprising. The Obama Administration has repeatedly maintained that the public has no privacy in public places. It began making that argument as early as 2010, when it told a federal appeals court that the authorities should be allowed to affix GPS devices on vehicles and track a suspect's every move without court authorization. The Supreme Court, however, eventually ruled that warrants are required. What's more, the administration has argued that placing a webcam with pan-and-zoom capabilities on a utility pole to spy on a suspect at his or her residence was no different from a police officer's observation from the public right-of-way. A federal judge last month disagreed with the government's position, tossing evidence gathered by the webcam that was operated from afar.
[. . .]
The Harris Corp., a maker of the devices from Florida, includes non-disclosure clauses with buyers. Baltimore authorities cited a non-disclosure agreement to a judge in November as their grounds for refusing to say how they tracked a suspect's mobile phone. They eventually dropped charges rather than disclose their techniques. Further, sometimes the authorities simply lie to judges about their use or undertake other underhanded methods to prevent the public from knowing that the cell-site simulators are being used.
[. . .]
"In Tacoma, judges now require police (to) specifically note they plan to use an IMSI catcher and promise not to store data collected from people who are not investigation targets," he said. "The Florida and Massachusetts state supreme courts ruled warrants were necessary for real-time cell phone tracking. Nine states—Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin—passed laws specifically requiring police to use a warrant to track a cell phone in real time."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/fbi-says-search-warrants-not-needed-to-use-stringrays-in-public-places/
FBI says search warrants not needed to use “stingrays” in public places
Feds' position on decoy cell-site towers continues anti-privacy theme.
by David Kravets
Jan 5 2015, 2:25pm EST
No comments:
Post a Comment