Showing posts with label Towers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Towers. Show all posts

September 16, 2015

FBI Using Fake Cell Phone Towers For Surveillance Without Warrant




[From article]
Americans scored a quiet but crucial victory this month in the defense of their rights against an overreaching federal government that too often refuses to acknowledge that its powers are limited.
A year ago, the Review-Journal told the story of a local man who discovered a cellphone listening device hidden somewhere near the South Point hotel-casino off Las Vegas Boulevard. The device — one of about 20 similar devices discovered across the nation — is known as an IMSI catcher. It impersonates a cellphone tower and intercepts a signal, allowing the user to break into nearby cellphones and collect their data: contacts, call records, emails — everything.
Now, everyone put on your shocked face. It turns out the federal government was behind them, and that few people understood how often federal agencies were using the technology — without oversight or accountability. Over the past year, judges, lawmakers, privacy advocates and the media have pressured the government to figure out who was using the devices, and how and why they were using them.



As reported this month by the Wall Street Journal, the Justice Department finally admitted to deploying the devices without warrants for use in data fishing expeditions, and said it would add more judicial and internal supervision to the program.
According to the Justice Department, supervisors now will be required to track more closely how the devices are used, as well as instruct investigators to delete all data collected on innocent Americans as soon as they apprehend their targeted suspects. This must be done at least once a day. Until this week, there was no policy on how long the data could be kept. (The changes don't apply to local and state police departments, which set their own rules in the use of IMSI catchers and answer to local judges, nor do they apply to secret Justice Department operations in Mexico and elsewhere outside our borders.)
[. . .]
The devices most commonly take the form of portable boxes that sit in an investigator's car while he or she searches a neighborhood for a suspect's phone. Other types of the devices are used in planes to scan thousands upon thousands of phones over larger areas. As with other forms of law enforcement snooping and searching, such measures are perfectly acceptable so long as police can demonstrate probable cause and obtain a warrant.
By now, Americans should understand that there is no such thing as digital privacy — not when China and Russia are hacking public and private entities around the world, not when the U.S. government collects data like a vacuum sucks dirt, and certainly not when more and more Americans create weak Internet passwords and share everything about themselves on social media.
Although privacy is essentially dead, our constitutional rights aren't. But we'll lose our liberties, too, if we aren't willing to fight for them every single day.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-privacy-victory-cellphone-listening-devices

Posted September 13, 2015 - 2:19pm
EDITORIAL: Privacy victory on cellphone listening devices

July 28, 2015

NYPD Removes POW Watchtower From Tompkins Square Park



The “SkyWatch” was up and running in Tompkins Square Park on July 22.
Photo: William Farrington
[From article]
The elevated “SkyWatch” booth was taken away at 6 a.m. Tuesday. It had been erected July 21 after a Post exposé about the hordes of homeless people who had invaded the park and Mayor Bill de Blasio’s subsequent attempt to chat up the vagrants living there.

The NYPD packed up the "SkyWatch" tower at Tompkins Square Park on Tuesday morning.
Photo: Demetrius E Loadholt

But despite the intention to provide a sense of security, the cops’ eye in the sky irked East Villagers who visited Tompkins Square Park on a daily basis.
“I don’t love seeing it here,” said Paul Engler, a 58-year-old business owner. “I think the police were doing their very best to make sure things stayed on the level, but I’d rather see cops walking around the park. That gives people access to them.”
[. . .]

People sleep in Tompkins Square Park.
Photo: Chad Rachman

“Don’t make no difference to me [that the tower is gone],” said another vagrant. “All the same s–t that was going on before they put it [in] was still going when it was here and it’s still going on now, and if you was about to do something, you just made sure you turned your back on it.”

http://nypost.com/2015/07/28/nypds-big-brother-watch-tower-removed-from-east-village/

NYPD’s Big Brother watch tower removed from East Village
By Kevin Fasick and Chris Perez
New York Post
July 28, 2015 | 10:37am

March 23, 2015

Updated: FBI: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Warrants To Listen To Your Phone Calls


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

February 23, 2015

Police Use Secret Technology For Surveillance, Refuse to Admit It Exists and To Identify It




This is one of numerous high tech devices used by government for surveillance and for harassment. if this technology is for sale you can be certain that criminals have access to it, along with their government protectors. In recent months I have been unable to reach several government agencies to complain about police harassment and harassment by criminals. (Not that they will act or anything, but just so they cannot say I did not complain.) I suspect that technology is available and being used not only to listen in, to track and to gather meta data, but also to divert the calls. Land line calls can be diverted using computers, hacking into telephone company switches. This was reported several years ago by the New York Times. Criminals diverted calls to steal business from competitors. Over many years I would call a government agency and end up speaking to a Harvard University student. I suspect it is happening again. On occasion it is a Harvard University campus police employee. Other times it is an attorney employed by the university. And still others by persons pretending to be doctors. This is an area that most people can understand. But there are many other areas of technology used to inflict pain and to manipulate thought and human emotions. It is not written about and as in this case the government will deny it exists, do what it can to hide its existence, and its use. The ACLU is doing some work in this area. Their web site is at ACLU.org  

[From article]
But before trial, his defense team detected investigators’ use of a secret surveillance tool, one that raises significant privacy concerns. In an unprecedented move, a state judge ordered the police to show the device — a cell-tower simulator sometimes called a StingRay — to the attorneys.
Rather than show the equipment, the state offered McKenzie a plea bargain.
[. . .]
McKenzie’s case is emblematic of the growing, but hidden, use by local law enforcement of a sophisticated surveillance technology borrowed from the national security world. It shows how a gag order imposed by the FBI — on grounds that discussing the device’s operation would compromise its effectiveness — has left judges, the public and criminal defendants in the dark on how the tool works.
[. . .]
The Tallahassee police used the StingRay or a similar device in more than 250 investigations over a six-year period, from mid-2007 through early 2014, according to a list of cases compiled by the Tallahassee Police Department and provided to the American Civil Liberties Union.
[. . .]
In Baltimore, a judge is pushing back against the refusal of police officers to answer questions while testifying. In Charlotte, following a newspaper investigation, the state’s attorney is reviewing whether prosecutors ­illegally withheld information about the device’s use from defendants.
In Tacoma, Wash., after a separate newspaper investigation found that judges in almost 200 cases had no idea they were issuing orders for the StingRay, the courts set new rules requiring police to disclose the tool’s use. The state legislature is weighing a bill to regulate police use of the equipment.
[. . .]
The FBI and Tallahassee police say that the device is used only with an appropriate court order and that they do not collect the content of calls or text messages. The FBI also said it retains only location data that is relevant to an investigation and immediately discards all other data.
So far, there is virtually no case law on how the Fourth Amendment — which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures — should apply to this technology.
[. . .]
In March, the defense team deposed police investigator Robert Newberry. The lawyers tried to get Newberry to explain how the police zeroed in on 3197 Springhill Rd. He mentioned the cell-tower records and then, under probing, acknowledged that they had not been sufficient on their own to locate the suspect.
He said a “Sergeant Corbitt” in the department’s technical operations unit had identified the phone’s location. “He would have to tell you how he got to that,” Newberry said, referring to Christopher Corbitt, who handles electronic surveillance operations.
[. . .]
Newberry could not fully explain how Corbitt determined the phone’s location. “I can’t address it because I don’t know the magic behind it,” he said.
[. . .]
But how did he know that the phone was in the house at 6 in the morning? The phone was a “burner” — one not registered under McKenzie’s name.
“We do have specific equipment that allows us to . . . direction-find on the handset, if necessary,” Corbitt said.
“What is that, and how does that work?” McMullen asked.
“I can’t go into that,” he said. “Due to [a] nondisclosure agreement with the FBI, we’re not able to get into the details of how the equipment operates.”
He acknowledged that the device was a cell-tower simulator.
[. . .]
He said that if the defense wanted more specific information, then he had “a specific protocol” to follow requiring him to notify the FBI and the Justice Department.
[. . .]
In June, in response to a motion for public access by the ACLU, the state released a transcript from a closed court hearing in 2010 relating to a Tallahassee rape case in which Corbitt testified that he had used a cell-site simulator to identify a suspect in an apartment complex. “In essence, we emulate a cellphone tower,” he said. “We force that handset to register with us. We identify that we have the correct handset and then we’re able to — by just merely direction-finding on the signal emanating from that handset — we’re able to determine a location.”
[. . .]
“Using portable equipment,” he said, “we were able to actually basically stand at every door and every window in that complex and determine, with relative certainty . . . the particular area of the apartment that that handset was emanating from.”
He said the Tallahassee police began using the device in the spring of 2007. From that point until August 2010, he said, the police had used it “200 or more times” to locate a cellphone.
How reliable was it? “Truthfully,” he said, “100 percent.”
[. . .]
The state’s attorney, Courtney Frazier, argued that details of the equipment’s operation were protected from disclosure under a law enforcement exception to the state open-records law.
Sheffield broke in. “What right does law enforcement have to hide behind the rules and to listen in and take people’s information like the NSA?” he said.
Frazier protested that the information about the device was sensitive and that disclosure could inhibit the police’s ability to catch criminals.
“Inhibiting law enforcement’s rights are second to protecting mine!” Sheffield thundered, gesturing with both hands and fixing his gaze on the prosecutor.
[. . .]
On Dec. 2, Sheffield signed the subpoena forcing Tallahassee police to show the device they used.
Two days before Corbitt was due to show up with the device, McMullen received notice of the plea deal from the prosecutor. She had never gotten such a sweet deal on a case.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/secrecy-around-police-surveillance-equipment-proves-a-cases-undoing/2015/02/22/ce72308a-b7ac-11e4-aa05-1ce812b3fdd2_story.html?hpid=z1

Secrecy around police surveillance equipment proves a case’s undoing
By Ellen Nakashima
February 22, 2015

January 3, 2015

US Senators Question Justice Department Use of "Mimic" Cell Phone Towers



Photo by: J. Scott Applewhite
Sens. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat (right), and Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican (left), asked about federal policy and the usage of simulator towers in a joint letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. (Associated Press)


[From article]
The senators cite a November article from the Wall Street Journal that reported the Justice Department is targeting criminal suspects using the devices, which mimic cellphone towers and can also snag information and general phone locations of innocent Americans.
While not confirming or denying the existence of such a program, a Justice Department official told the paper that agencies comply with federal law, including by seeking court approval, and that discussion of such matters would allow suspects or foreign powers to determine U.S. surveillance capabilities.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/leahy-grassley-wants-answers-from-doj-dhs-on-cell-/

Congress demands answers on feds’ cellphone tracking by simulator towers
By David Sherfinski
The Washington Times
Wednesday, December 31, 2014

September 5, 2014

Updated: Rogue Cell Phone Towers Can Intercept Your Calls


Posted September 4, 2014 9:19 PM ET; Last updated September 5, 2014 7:29 PM ET



Here's another example of technology as a threat to individual liberty, and a danger to safety from civilian criminals. The ACLU remains focused on abuses by government actors. Who is regulating the related issue of technology being used by private criminals? How do we prevent these abuses? The police are mostly clueless and reluctant to act to curb technological abuses by criminals. 

http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/05/fake-cellphone-towers/?ncid=rss_truncated

Fake cellphone towers hiding in plain sight, intercepting your phone calls

September 5, 2014

* * *

[From article]
The origin of these devices that disguise themselves as cell phone towers is not known.
CBS 2 security analyst Ross Rice, a former FBI agent, said it’s likely being used illegally.
[. . .]
“Most likely, they are installed and operated by hackers, trying to steal personal identification and passwords.”
Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America, which makes secure cell phones, said law enforcement, with a warrant, can use interceptor devices if they need information in real time, or if they don’t want a cellular network to know what they are tracking.
These devices don’t look like a tower, but are rather electronic boxes and laptops that trick a regular phone that it’s part of an actual cellular network.
[. . .]
The top of the line ESD phone costs around $3,500. Goldsmith said they do a lot of business with governments, but are selling more privately, including about 200 units today alone.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/09/03/rouge-cell-towers-can-intercept-your-data-at-least-one-found-in-chicago/

Rogue ‘Cell Towers’ Can Intercept Your Data; At Least One Found In Chicago
By John Dodge
CBS News Chicago IL
September 3, 2014 1:02 PM

August 1, 2010

Hacker Diverts Cell Calls

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/intercepting-cell-phone-calls/

Hacker Spoofs Cell Phone Tower to Intercept Calls
By Kim Zetter Email Author
July 31, 2010 |