Slashdot Mirror
Cellebrite Is Developing Roadside Police 'Textalyzer' Device (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Cellebrite, the company many believe helped the FBI crack into the iPhone 5c belonging to a San Bernardino terrorist, is developing a roadside "textalyzer" device to help law enforcement determine whether someone involved in a motor vehicle accident was unlawfully driving while distracted. As reported from Ars Technica: "Under the first-of-its-kind legislation proposed in New York, drivers involved in accidents would have to submit their phone to roadside testing from a textalyzer to determine whether the driver was using a mobile phone ahead of a crash." The textalyzer allegedly would keep conversations, contacts, numbers, photos, and application data private in an effort to get around the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. "Cellebrite has been leading the adoption of field mobile forensics solutions by law enforcement for years, culminating in the formal introduction of our UFED FIELD series product line a year ago," Jim Grady, Cellebrite's CEO, said in a statement. "We look forward to supporting DORCs and law enforcement -- both in New York and nationally to curb distracted driving."
Or, I could RTFA. "Further analysis, which might require a warrant, could be necessary to determine whether such usage was via hands-free dashboard technology and to confirm the original finding."
So you'd potentially be declared guilty of driving whilst distracted until a warrant was obtained to determine that you were using hands-free?
One would think that since they're already in the device that such a thing could easily be determined.
Nobody expects The Spanish Inquisition!
sounds legit...
-------
1. Enjoy your job
2. Make lots of money
3. Work within the law
Choose any two.
Crazy, many new cars let you send and receive via voice now. Hell, even can listen and send without you picking them up.
Sounds like a good excuse to copy peoples phones, pull someone over for "texting while driving" and scan their phone... No warrant needed.
I personally can think of an easy way of avoiding this completely:
If you see red and blue lights, put your phone in airplane mode, throw it under the seat, and deny you even have one. Same if you're involved in a collision. If the cop asks to search your car, tell him that his rights to search your car are about as good as your rights to give him a cavity search.
This would be a brain dead law to enact, designed to only enrich Cellebrite. There are many ways there could be recent texts on your phone that would be completely legal under current US law in all 50 states. For example, a friend could be using your phone while you drive to text and respond to texts directed to you, or you could be using voice texting. Either the legislators are not very technically savvy, or in Cellebrite's pocket.
Does your phone have to be visible to the officer, or can they now search your car without a warrant to see if you've hidden a phone in it?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Tell that to the third parties companies that sell the red-light cameras. There's been numerous instances of the red-light cameras issuing false citations, and those companies pressuring localities to reduce the amount of time a yellow light is shown, in order to get more revenue at the expense of safety.
This is the problem with the whole discussion. Law enforcement should not have access to the contents of your phone without a warrant. The focus on encryption it makes the emphasis on this discussion whether or not law enforcement should be able to crack your phone instead of what business they have examining your phone without a warrant in the first place.
Would you let someone search your house without a warrant, even if they had a key? Why should your phone, which is your property, also be subject to illegal unreasonable search? Why should the data products that your phone produce that are not contained on the phone be subject to ongoing monitoring without a warrant?
Record the phone number, get a warrant and ask the telecommunications companies for the *times* of your text messages and phone calls that day. No phone access required.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But there is no implied consent for submitting your phone.
That's what buying your local legislator is for, sonny. From the actual text of the proposed New York bill:
2. Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state shall be ...
deemed to have given consent to a portable electronic device field test
for the purpose of determining portable electronic device usage when
involved in an accident while operating a motor vehicle including phone
activity for the period of time immediately preceding the accident
[ALL CAPS removed to get around /.'s loudness filter]
Breakfast served all day!
The joke is on them! in 4 out of the last 5 accident I was involved in I was not texting, I was reading slashdot!
Does your wallet have a light-up screen? Especially at night?
If your answer is 'no,' then you need the new Lite-up Wallet from Slashdot Industries. The Lite-Up Wallet is more than just a wallet that lights up, it's a whole new way of carrying your personal paper possessions. Worried that you'll fumble for a dollar bill and accidentally tip the valet with a twenty? Worry no more, as the Lite-Up Wallet guides you to the proper denomination. Need to make sure that you use the credit card that still has credit available? The Lite-Up Wallet clearly illuminates all your cards and makes selection a snap! The Lite-Up Wallet comes in three colors and four sizes, and if you order today, WE WILL SEND YOU TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE!
Those things piss me off to no end.
There are a few in my area with such a short yellow light that, depending on the distance, it would be safer to run the red light than to slam on the brakes.
In other words, it's a magic probable cause generator.
Perhaps at one time before law enforcement in this country proved how much it was willing to lie cheat and steal, even in a court of law under oath, this might be a really good thing. These days, I don't trust them not to rig the device to retain data beyond what's permitted and I don't trust them not to rig it to be a probable cause generator. I'm not even sure I trust them not to use it to implant incriminating evidence in the phone, or a virus.
GAH! I can't decide weather this rates as "funny", "troll" or "insightful". Something is seriously f'ed up somewhere, and I'm not certain it's me.
I personally can think of an easy way of avoiding this completely:
If you see red and blue lights, put your phone in airplane mode, throw it under the seat, and deny you even have one. Same if you're involved in a collision. If the cop asks to search your car, tell him that his rights to search your car are about as good as your rights to give him a cavity search.
LoL,
If you see Red and Blue, its too late. You wont have time to put the phone in aeroplane mode, you definitely wont be able to do it without the officers noticing.
No you cant, dont argue with me, you are not as clever as you think you are.
The reason idiots get caught on their phone is because they get so distracted by it that they become completely oblivious to anything around them. Green lights, concrete bollards, other vehicles and the cop walking up right next to them. Also all your "clever" tricks are also dead givaways, no-one sits in the car and stares intently at their crotch for 5 minutes unless they've got a phone down there.
I can think of a much easier solution, put the fucking phone away whilst you're driving. If this is too onerous or you think you're good enough that it doesn't apply to you (clue by four: you are not), start taking the bus.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
So why isn't the minimum amount of time that a yellow light must be shown fixed by law based on scientific reasons (e.g. current speed limit, expected reaction time of a worst-case, legal driver, etc.)?
Because then they cannot generate more revenue. These redlight camera outfits are not there to uphold the law. The are there to make a profit. When you are there to make a profit, at least in America, you have to make more profit this quarter than last quarter.
Apparently the results of the yellow light shortening has been after it is implemented, drivers hopon the sprags as soon as they see one, treating it as a red light. This has resulted in more rear ending accidents, as the number one sport in the US is tailgaiting so closely that you owe the person in front of you at least a dinner and a movie. http://time.com/3643077/red-li...
https://www.motorists.org/blog...
Red light cameras and for profit prisons are turning out to be birds of a feather. Institutionalized evil.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Crazy, many new cars let you send and receive via voice now. Hell, even can listen and send without you picking them up.
Sounds like a good excuse to copy peoples phones, pull someone over for "texting while driving" and scan their phone... No warrant needed.
former cop here. just...no. cops always need a warrant to search your person or seize your property, and probable cause if they are going to detain you. your busted licence plate light is all they need for the latter; you gave them the former via "implied consent" when you signed for your driver's license. Most civilians don't understand that a traffic stop is an arrest, and thus all the civil protections afforded citizens in the Constitution apply, meaning the cops have to follow the rules. Incidentally, that is probably why there is so much push back from cops about being recorded -- they aren't used to having to follow the rules. Some jerk's iphone record of their failure to do so imperils their career. Next time a cop pulls you over, ask him point blank: Am I being detained? If the first word out of his mouth is anything other than "Yes" drive away. A smart cop is going to smile ruefully and wait for a less savvy citizen to meet his roadside revenue quota. A dumb cop is going to call for back up and get his ass handed to him by his desk sergeant, the chief of police, the city prosecutor, and the judge at your trial (in the extremely unlikely event it gets that far) if he tries to detain you again.
Sorry for the discursion. To bring this back on point, while existing implied consent laws can be easily adapted to include any electronic devices discovered in the course of your traffic stop, that is not the real issue here. People really need to understand that you are "under arrest" even when you are just being given a traffic ticket, and that you haven't surrendered your civil rights just because some cop thought you were an easy mark for a little quasi-legal extortion. You are protected by a robust set of principles enshrined in the Constitution, and you can rely on their protection when confronted by a cop who just wants to make his quota for the month and engage in a little data mining of your phone while he's at it.