Slashdot Mirror
Across US, Police Officers Abuse Confidential Databases (ap.org)
Sadie Gurman and Eric Tucker, reporting for Associated Press:Police officers across the country misuse confidential law enforcement databases to get information on romantic partners, business associates, neighbors, journalists and others for reasons that have nothing to do with daily police work, an Associated Press investigation has found. Criminal-history and driver databases give officers critical information about people they encounter on the job. But the AP's review shows how those systems also can be exploited by officers who, motivated by romantic quarrels, personal conflicts or voyeuristic curiosity, sidestep policies and sometimes the law by snooping. In the most egregious cases, officers have used information to stalk or harass, or have tampered with or sold records they obtained. No single agency tracks how often the abuse happens nationwide, and record-keeping inconsistencies make it impossible to know how many violations occur. But the AP, through records requests to state agencies and big-city police departments, found law enforcement officers and employees who misused databases were fired, suspended or resigned more than 325 times between 2013 and 2015. They received reprimands, counseling or lesser discipline in more than 250 instances, the review found.
Our government in the US needs more money and power.
To use against us!
So make certain you and everyone else PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE!!!!
and no camera recording. What could go wrong?
Am I just paranoid, or does it seem that everywhere personal data is collected, it is abused?
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Power without oversight is being abused? For real? That must be a first in human history!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So a 50/50 of getting fired if you get caught. That sounds pretty reasonable, as some of these were of the "is this chick I met last night trying to scam me?" sort of queries, which is a violation of the rules, but in itself a reasonable question. It also demonstrates that at some level, the oversight and auditing is working, as a significant number get caught.
I think not. These are people with guns. Just let them fuck around with a computer. Keep them off the streets so the rest of us are safe.
When these abuses are caught by the dept (they aren't), the officer involved will be punished (they won't).
Of course they are abusing database access they are abusing PEOPLE!
Wouldn't this fall under CFAA?
I had a college friend who was pulled over by a cop. That night, he called her up for a date.
She blasted him. He responded with, "I could have given you a ticket and I STILL can!"
She told him to go ahead and fuck off. I told her to file a complaint against him but she let it go.
Cop didn't do shit.
People with power and everybody else are like children.
If your kid steals a cookie and you don't do anything, he will keep stealing cookies. He then will not steal them, but just take them. First you ask, then you beg and then you yell. He will still take the cookies.
Put that kid on a timeout once and 99% of the kids will stop stealing cookies. The other 1% needs to be learned in other ways. But what will happen is if you put these together, the 99% will be an influence of the 1% and prevent the 1% of stealing the cookie.
What have these kids learned? They have learned that there will be consequences. To be fair, sometimes the consequences are worth it. I would gladly stand in timeout for a GREAT cookie.
However never getting a reprimand is the cause of the problem of escalated cookie stealing.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Not just law enforcement. It's why you shouldn't store private data unencrypted on cloud services like Dropbox, Google Drive, OneDrive. Like Ned from GoT thinking a piece of paper signed by the king was going to protect him, you're a fool if you think some company policy prohibiting employees from perusing client data is going to protect you. Those cloud services really should be offering client-side encryption as a standard feature. That they don't should tell you that they are making money by browsing through your files to glean data about you that they can sell to others.
I work at a hospital. We audit people's access to medical records. You can be, and people have been, fired for looking at their own medical record or the medical records of their minor children when that access was made in a way that does not directly relate to their job. You are required to ask for the information the same as any other patient.
If only we could spread that kind of accountability and auditing...
The earth is round!
"We're gonna need a bigger boat"
Had an ex-friend that did this to his wife during divorce to harass any of their friends that was trying to help her.
The solution is pretty simple, but often skipped:
1) The reason for every search should be required and logged by the searcher. Example: "Related to case 12345, this person was a close match to the suspect description given by clerk at robbed market, who was interviewed by officer 84923 on Aug 7th." (In practice short-cut lingo can be used to reduce typing.)
2) The logs be randomly spot-checked by an auditor(s) who verifies the reasons given by interviewing the person(s) who searched.
3) The depth of the investigation will vary such that some will be pretty thorough. (Not every spot-check can be deep, but make enough deep to keep users on their toes.)
4) Those who've failed past audits or enter poor records are audited more often.
This won't catch every violation, but greatly reduces it because the search-user doesn't know which search will be audited and how deep the audit will be.
The reason this is not implemented is that governments and/or tax-payers don't want to pay for logging features and auditors.
Table-ized A.I.
Somehow all the Trumpies on here are going crow at the injustice of this kind of abuse yet fail to see how it is directly analogous to the Stop and Frisk tactics that their hero repeatedly and strenuously advocated during Monday's debate....
Clarification:
Re: "The logs be randomly spot-checked by an auditor(s) who verifies the reasons given by interviewing the person(s) who searched."
Rewrite: "The logs be randomly spot-checked by an auditor(s) who verifies the reasons given by checking existing records, and interviewing the person(s) who searched if any discrepancies or gaps are found."
Table-ized A.I.
Back when I was working at a call center (processing credit applications for several different companies) we had access to credit reports. If we looked up someone's credit report that was not applying for credit, it was immediate termination. I couldn't even look up credit reports for people that had the same last name as myself. If that situation came up, we had to transfer the application to a different service rep.
Years later, I worked at a hospital. They had similar restrictions and consequences regarding patient records due to HIPPA regulations.
I heard an anecdotal story about the owner of several Wendy's franchises had issues with people stealing ketchup packets. So they decided to keep the packets behind the counter and patrons had to ask for them. Abuse went down by some huge number.
I think officers have to radio into dispatch all the time (any time they pull someone over, see something suspicious, etc). Database access should be a 2-person deal. Dispatch gets a popup of searches the officer is doing when the officer radios in and dispatch has the opportunity to flag any suspicious access. I think just knowing someone is readily watching would greatly reduce abuse.
The databases in question hold information such as driver licenses, car registration, criminal histories,warrants, missing persons, etc. In Ohio the main law enforcement database is LEADS which also ties into national criminal justice databases, Access to LEADS is regularly AUDITED. People who misuse it are routinely prosecuted. These databases are very important to public safety. You can never prevent misuse, but you can hold users accountable for their use of the system.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Of course they do. Funny thing about power, it corrupts. I have little respect for authorities anymore. I miss my country of old...
A nation-wide one that permanently keeps track of the psycho bullies that do all that the TFA mentions, along with the more generally-accepted assaults and murders they conduct that are rarely punished. Most of the time, these a-holes are told if they resign, they won't be prosecuted. Then, they just move across the country, or even just one desperate little burg over and they setup up their sadistic snuff career all over again.
We talk about serial killers and offenders, but the ones we need to talk about AND TRACK are the serial abusers in LEO.
And a review of each use with a case number as a cross reference....
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
As someone who has helped implement digital systems which "needed" to be backdoord for TLAs/LEOs under CALEA, the standards applied to physical systems and auditing are just not implemented for digital systems. Because of 'terrorism, and the children, and funding, and tooth faeries... So glad I no longer work in this space.
CATO Institute http://www.policemisconduct.net/
Anyone and everyone that has access to big data does personal searches because NONE of these systems requires you to have an open case or reason to do the search. Just enter a name and some details and there is the info.
Sure access is logged, but who is checking that? The one and only reason an audit of access logs are ever done is if a lawsuit or other complaint/case comes up. Otherwise they are all flying under the radar doing their personal stuff along with their "work"
And our commander in chief will do so also PLUS email
My complete police record (to my knowledge) would list the following, if at all...
One fender bender vs. a parked car (I won't make excuses, I fucked up)
One speeding ticket (65 in a 50 -- km not mph)
One warning to turn my lights on when it was just getting to be dusk
Wonder what kind of stains would be on most officers records if there was no cronyism.
IRS has also. Every local and fed has done this.
...corruption universally. If you work for the government or one of its contractors, you should be filmed at all times, and have all your texts and emails monitored. A parallel law for the private sector should kick in for executives.
Is that intrusive? Yes, that's the point. Would it work? Not perfectly, but it would knock out a lot of casual corruption and catch quite a few of the more egregious abusers, particularly in the defense industry and the three letter agencies.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Ex father in law sargeant told me as much after we were married.
Yet if they make a recording of it for "personal use" they've broken the law. Law enforcement needs to be held accountable for abusing/misusing their equipment too.
The last 8 years have been disastrous for America. The blacks are rioting and the police are told to do nothing or else they appear racist.
We elected and re-elected an uppity negro to the White House and we wonder why we're all seeing a real life Planet of the Apes play out in cities all across America.
Let's not even start on the muslim problem we're going to have, much like Europe.
If we've learned nothing from history, we've learned that the white man should have picked his own damned cotton.
The solution is pretty simple, but often skipped: ...
1) The reason for every search should be required and logged by the searcher.
2) The logs be randomly spot-checked by an auditor(s) who verifies the reasons given by interviewing the person(s) who searched.
But to check it the auditors need detailed access to the records. So who audits THEM?
This kind of question has been asked repeatedly since at least the Roman Empire.
(The U.S. answer to "Who guards the guardians?" , at least for direct abuse of person under color of law, is the Fourth and Fifth amendments and the "fruit of the poisoned tree" doctrine: Fail to follow the law and you don't get a conviction, because misbehaving police are FAR more of a problem for the population than even a lot of violent private-enterprise crooks going back to work. But while it does reduce the incentive, it doesn't block the behavior.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
They're just like everybody else. Employees at all kinds of jobs do similar things.
If you expect cops to be different, you don't know much about humans.
I've often wondered how useful these databases truly are, like driver licenses and automotive registrations. I had a discussion once where the need for driver licenses came up. I think it had something to do with illegal immigrants driving. So I thought I do some searching on the internet on how many people drove without licenses. The truth is that no one knows and very few people have enough information to even estimate it. There could be 10 million unlicensed drivers out there, give or take about 40 million.
What is clear is that unlicensed drivers tend to get in more accidents. This is not surprising. People with a habit of drink driving will eventually lose their license or die trying. Those that are lucky enough to survive having their license revoked will simply drive without a license. There is no requirement to have a license to drive to own a car. I'm not even sure one needs a license to insure the car either, not that a lack of insurance is going to stop these people.
Now we see police officers abusing these databases for their own personal amusement or enrichment. I say we just get rid of the licenses.
The question then inevitably comes up, if we don't license drivers then how do we (the state, the public, whatever) know that people (you know, not me and you, those other people) know how to drive. I say that every day is a driving test, people that fail will be pulled over by law enforcement. Those that are repeat offenders get noted in a database, and if serious enough of an offense they get put in jail. I just said "database" didn't I? Yes, I did. The database is only of offenders, not all drivers. What if a person gets in an accident or causes problems, how will we know who they are? Same way we do it now when people drive without a license. We can ask them their name. If that's not good enough then ask for some identifying document, like a voter registration card (which in my mind is about the only thing honest citizens need a photo ID for). If that's not good enough then haul them to the station, take their picture, take their fingerprints, and make them sit in a cell until all the paperwork goes through.
What about commercial drivers? Do you want the people driving school buses to not have licenses? What of people hauling radioactive waste? I can imagine quite the competitive business in issuing driving certificates, the local community college does this already as I see their trucks on the interstate with a big yellow "STUDENT DRIVER" sign on the trailer and tractor. If a shady certificate agency is issuing certificates in bad faith then they will lose customers real quick. When it comes to people driving for the government there are driving schools run by government agencies already, like the military driving school at Fort Leonard Wood. I'm not sure how that works but anyone that graduates from there gets the equivalent of a commercial driver license. If it's really that important then we already have the schools and certifications for it. For people driving themselves and their family they should not need a license.
Another note on the driving education, the local community college offers classes for passenger vehicles too. I saw four different course types on their website, commercial, "drivers ed" (two kinds here, "high school" and "AARP"), RV training, and "mandated" (as in people with OWI that are court ordered to take a class). It's not like there is a lack of driver training. What's going to force people to take the training if we don't have licensing? How about not getting pulled over for not obeying the traffic laws? As if there is any enforcement now. Remember where I started? Nobody knows how many unlicensed drivers there are now. This might be because the unlicensed drivers are VERY careful and don't want to get pulled over. The safest drivers out there are probably the guys with brownish skin and just downed a pint at the pub. Yep, I just played the "driving while brown" card.
Everyone uses the DMV as to
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
How is this news? There have been news articles published on police abusing databases for as long as these databases have existed.
Cop Suspected of Using Database to Plan Murder of Ex-wife (Michigan)
Rookie Cop Checks on 'Potential Girlfriends': 6,900 Database Searches in Only Two Months (Australia)
FBI Files Sold to Mob and International Criminals by Nevada Attorney General's Office Employee and Former FBI Agent (Las Vegas)
Indiana PD Banned From FBI Database (Highland, Indiana)
Political Candidates Probed by Police Chief (Eastpointe, Michigan)
Police Investigated for Using Database to Target Organizers of Sheriff-Recall Campaign (Kansas)
Prosecutor's Office Uses Database to Smear Prosecutor's Political Opponent
Police Lieutenant Charged With Abusing Database to Influence Elections (Maryland)
Cop Uses Database to Find Woman's Unlisted Phone Number -- Gives It to Woman's Ex (Brisbane, Australia)
Cop Fired for Abusing Database, Chief Accused as Well (Altherton, California)
Only took me ten seconds on Google to dig these up and the list just goes on and on and on...
No, seriously. Anyone. In the slightest little bit. Surprised?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"