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The brief reads in part: 'The whereabouts of a cellular telephone are not "withdrawn from public view" until it is turned off, or its SIM card removed.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.'"
The brief reads in part: 'The whereabouts of a cellular telephone are not "withdrawn from public view" until it is turned off, or its SIM card removed.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.'"
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.
He's missing the point. Everyone knows that the post office handles all your mail, but it's still not allowed to tell the police what you're receiving without a warrant. The existence of a record does not imply the availability of that record to law enforcement or the government.
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
Then why did they keep the Stingray surveillance secret? They should immediately release all the Stringray documents into the public domain! Even now they're fighting tooth and nail to conceal not just the details of the device, but the details on when it was used!
I also don't think people realize the depth of the surveillance problems with these smartphones, and I bet most people think dumb phones (without GPS) don't track location at all. They would be wrong, even a dumb-phone is location trackable. So his claim of full knowledge of everyone (and some sort of implicit agreement) is therefore false.
But Stingray also tracks ASSOCIATIONS, who you call and who calls you, even if you're not the target being followed, and possibly even the calls themselves and other data. We don't really know because Stringray is just one brand and we can't see the data on what these devices are capable of, we only know that modern calls have piss poor encryption courtesy of meddling.
i.e. it violates the freedom of association by imposing warrantless surveillance.
It's been used against journalists to locate their whistleblower sources and against protestors to block protests, so it does not have mass knowledge+consent.
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.
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.
Your suggested interval is too much work, BUT...
If someone were to figure out the MAC address of his cell phone's WiFi interface (assuming it isn't an Apple that scrambles MAC addresses), a volunteer-run network of consumer-grade routers scattered around the city could get a pretty good fix on his location. I'm using the term 'network' very loosely here, of course; it's a network in that they're affiliated, not in that they're functionally connected. It would be 100% legal and inexpensive to do.
www.wavefront-av.com
Why get upset? Everyone knows it's happening. Therefore you must expect it and tolerate it when the police do it.
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
Surely you jest. Even if you were serious, you probably don't have the resources to pull it off nor you may have any ideas of how to make money off this. But all it takes is someone to plant this idea in the head of some pointy haired boss in Goldman Sachs or JPMC. There are sitting on two trillion dollars of excess capital and don't know what to do with it. They might decide to do it. Atleast with the government you might get a chance to vote against it or legislate against it. But once Goldman does it, that is the end. There is nothing anyone, including Goldman can do about it.
So stop giving them ideas.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
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
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?