Slashdot Mirror


Stingray Case Lawyers: "Everyone Knows Cell Phones Generate Location Data" (techdirt.com)

An anonymous reader writes with news that the Maryland Attorney General is arguing that anyone who has ever used a smartphone knows it's tracking them, so no warrant is needed for stingrays. Techdirt says: "Up in Baltimore, where law enforcement Stingray device use hit critical mass faster and more furiously than anywhere else in the country (to date...) with the exposure of 4,300 deployments in seven years, the government is still arguing there's no reason to bring search warrants into this. The state's Attorney General apparently would like the Baltimore PD's use of pen register orders to remain standard operating procedure. According to a brief filed in a criminal case relying on the warrantless deployment of an IMSI catcher (in this case a Hailstorm), the state believes there's no reason for police to seek a warrant because everyone "knows" cell phones generate data when they're turned on or in use.

The brief reads in part: 'The whereabouts of a cellular telephone are not "withdrawn from public view" until it is turned off, or its SIM card removed. Anyone who has ever used a smartphone is aware that the phone broadcasts its position on the map, leading to, for example, search results and advertising tailored for the user's location, or to a "ride-sharing" car appearing at one's address. And certainly anyone who has ever used any sort of cellular telephone knows that it must be in contact with an outside cell tower to function.'"

8 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone "knows", the new legal standard by Falconnan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The mere fact that the data exists is not itself the point. It is completely reasonable to expect some degree of privacy in one's communications regardless of how easily they are intercepted (which everyone "knows"). Physical mail is easily intercepted and read too. Is this the new standard that will allow the police to randomly read an entire neighborhood's mail as well? What ever happened to "probable cause"? But then, I was born in the 20th century, so I guess I'm just old-fashioned.

    1. Re:Everyone "knows", the new legal standard by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So if you happen do be in a restaurant and overhear someone explaining how their company is 'going public' tomorrow, and they have orders lined up from a specific investor at double the initial pricing, it's not merely permissible for you to take advantage of that overheard conversation, but to act on the information and contact that investor, offer them a slightly better deal, taking your profit. Not knowing that this individual was talking to their broker, who then, after you left to find a private place and make your move, telling them that was improper and could not be done...

      And this is ok, because it's a public place. For the sake of argument, let's pretend the situation I described is reasonable and pass on the legalities...

      The FCC has issued rules specifying that overheard or intercepted communications cannot be divulged or used to advantage (Section 705, for instance) for some time.

      While recording conversations in public places is generally held to be permissible, doing so with conversations that are reasonably believed to be private by the participants is illegal under (Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. 2511 specifically). From an article online:

      "In response to the public outcry about the government’s covert recording of the activities of political activist groups in the 1960s, Congress enacted the Wiretap Act as part of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. (18 U.S.C. 2510.)"

      Apparently we need to revisit this act. Not that our government is secretly recording the activities of groups or individuals suspected of some acts, specified or not, but that the government is recording everything it can, indiscriminately.

      No, they should not be allowed to do so.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  2. By their logic by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By their own logic I should have just as easy of a time to be able to set up my own cell towers and siphon in all the location data that comes into it, and the government can't say boo about it. I should be able to know where everyone who connects to my personal cell tower is located at that moment, in an effort to stalk my girlfriend without her ever knowing about it. As noted in other threads already: They can't legally expect to be able to go through the mail of an entire neighborhood at the post office level, as such, they should not expect to be able to do essentially the same thing with setting up their own cell towers.

  3. Re:So why the secrecy by NotInHere · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Then why did they keep the Stingray surveillance secret? They should immediately release all the Stringray documents into the public domain!

    Everybody knows that the information that they collect cell phone data is a secret.

  4. Removing the SIM doesn't change the IMEI. by tlambert · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Removing the SIM doesn't change the IMEI.

    Hailstorm tracks by IMEI; SIM data is incidental. Someone should demonstrate tracking him with his SIM removed. I expect he might be ... disturbed.

  5. Everyone knows cops shoot unarmed black men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why get upset? Everyone knows it's happening. Therefore you must expect it and tolerate it when the police do it.

  6. "Everyone knows" THAT WARRANTS ARE REQUIRED! by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if cellphones are technically trackable, what "everyone knows" is that the government is legally required to refrain from using that information without a warrant. You know, the whole "rule of law" and all that? Any government official who has problem with that concept should be removed from office.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  7. Defense calls surprise expert witness for rebuttal by Munchr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hello, Maryland AG's Mother, and thank you for appearing in front of us today as an expert Mother. Your son has argued that everyone knows cell phones create, store, and broadcast location data all the time so no warrant is needed for tracking them. Did you know that your phone is reporting your location to the phone company 24 hours a day? Did you know your son wants to know where you go every hour of the day, and believes he has the right to do so without a warrant?