Slashdot Mirror


Federal Agents Used a Stingray To Track an Immigrant's Phone (detroitnews.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Investigators from Immigration and Custom Enforcement as well as the FBI have been using controversial cell-spoofing devices to secretly track down undocumented immigrants, court records show. According to a report the Detroit News, which obtained an unsealed federal search warrant affidavit, FBI and ICE agents in Michigan used a Stingray device to ensnare a restaurant worker from El Salvador in March. The devices, which were originally intended for counter-terrorism use, have come under fire because there are currently no clear rules governing when law enforcement is allowed to deploy them. Even in cases where authorities have a clear target in mind, they run the risk of exposing personal information of other innocent people in range. Until 2015, Federal investigators were free to deploy the devices without a search warrant. At that point the Justice Department laid out a policy requiring investigators get approval to use the devices first.

47 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. Feel good story of the day? by Flentil · · Score: 1

    Your tax dollars at work

    1. Re:Feel good story of the day? by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      As has been said before: Anything that is not forbidden is mandatory.

    2. Re:Feel good story of the day? by rmdingler · · Score: 2
      If there's anything to feel good about, it's that the law now requires at least a search warrant to be deployed. Though the level of evidence required to attain a judge's signature will continue to vary by administration, alleged offense, and even what circuit the request is logged in, it's still better than pre-2015 when it was up to the discretion of law enforcement.

      I may be jaded, but I simply assume if a technology is at the disposal of investigators, it will be deployed. Any legislation that requires the LEO's to explain what their doing is a win.

      Beware the Boogeymem: Illegal immigrants, Pedobears, and Terrorists. These are the cause du jour where exception to normal protocol is initially permitted, and each time you stoop to a distasteful act, it becomes that much easier to stoop again.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    3. Re:Feel good story of the day? by someone1234 · · Score: 2

      Won't that make America great again?

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    4. Re: Feel good story of the day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "a restaurant worker from El Salvador"

      No, it's going to make it worse, you numskull.

      Who now is going to make me the best food in ever?

      In ever!!!

    5. Re:Feel good story of the day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not only illegal waitressing, but they could not have got hired without providing a Social Security number (which has to false). Falsifying government records is a felony, not to mention identity theft. But, you know, it's ok to victimize innocent people just because that's the only way to get away with breaking the law.

    6. Re: Feel good story of the day? by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      I think we should refer to drug dealers as "undocumented pharmacists."

    7. Re:Feel good story of the day? by Flentil · · Score: 2

      providing a Social Security number (which has to false). Falsifying government records is a felony

      So he printed a little piece of paper and then used it to GET A JOB? Golly, that is serious. I am certainly willing to give up my privacy rights to stop things like terrorist truck bombs and questionable job applications, since those two things are basically the same.

      If the SS number just happens to match your SS#, now you've got problems with the IRS and possibly your credit rating and maybe a life changing cascade of bad shit you need to sort out as a result of this little bit of identity theft. Completely harmless, right? I guess you never thought this through, or you just don't give a fuck because you expect all that to happen to someone else, not you.

    8. Re:Feel good story of the day? by Imrik · · Score: 1

      I'm less concerned about them having a good reason than I am about them having to leave a paper trail stating their reason, good or not.

  2. 1984 by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

    Just one step away from using these to round up political dissenters and whistleblowers.

    1. Re:1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what is difference? How is citizen dissenter like illegal alien invader?

    2. Re: 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If I were to enter your house, start living there, and eat food from your refrigerator, you're saying you would not consider me an invader and wouldn't do anything to have me removed?

      Illegal aliens were not invited into this country and they steal resources from Americans. See the government services in Spanish? That costs extra money that taxpayers have to pay for. If you know any physicians that work at a hospital, ask them how much bills the hospital has to "eat" because of illegal aliens. Then consider that the hospitals just raise the prices of health care on people who actually pay for their incurred expenses.

      Let's not even talk about affirmative action policies that will ultimately favor illegal immigrants over Americans. It is an absolute outrage that outsiders are treated better than Americans in our own country, especially when there are many Americans who really could use some help.

    3. Re: 1984 by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      It's not unless you're a tightwad business owner who's after the cheapest possible labor at all costs.

  3. Warrant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sooooo... These guys are upset that the Feds followed the law and got a warrant???

    1. Re:Warrant by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sooooo... These guys are upset that the Feds followed the law and got a warrant???

      Except we were promised these things won't be used except for matters of national security.

      Also, Stingrays have no way to selectively MitM only the target, so they spy (in violation of the 4th Amendment) on every single innocent person in a large radius.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re: Warrant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No it's he fact that resources are spent on finding illegals even though the amount of violent crime and murders have reduced dramatically since the 1990s even though we had a huge influx of illegals. Lazy government wants to capture restaurant workers instead of rapists and murderers. Many rape cases are not even investigated, let alone solved. In some cities even homicides are not looked at properly. Now we want to spend resources hunting restaurant workers? Assuming 1% of illegals are violent criminals (a number way higher than real) that means you have to deport 100 people per reducing by one violent criminal .. that is massively inefficient -- not to mention the criminal gets to do crime in home country. Second, illegals are more likely to be victims of violent crime therefore they in a sense may by being victims themselves reduce the violent crime effect on natives (sort of like taking the bullet). My point -- tracking down illegals is a waste of resources and not an effective method of tackling violent crime.

    3. Re:Warrant by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Sooooo... These guys are upset that the Feds followed the law and got a warrant???

      No. We are upset that the law allows the feds to do this at all. Here is the 4th Amendment:

      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

      The "location" should not be "within 5 km of our stingray" and the persons should not be "everybody in range".

    4. Re:Warrant by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Waves of illegal aliens IS a national security matter.

    5. Re:Warrant by Flentil · · Score: 1

      Sooooo... These guys are upset that the Feds followed the law and got a warrant???

      Except we were promised these things won't be used except for matters of national security.

      Also, Stingrays have no way to selectively MitM only the target, so they spy (in violation of the 4th Amendment) on every single innocent person in a large radius.

      You don't think foreigners sneaking into our country illegally is a matter of national security? It's the definition of national security you dolt.

    6. Re:Warrant by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Waves of illegal aliens IS a national security matter.

      The "waves of illegal aliens" ended more than a decade ago. Net immigration from Mexico is near zero.

      More Mexicans leaving than coming to the US

  4. Curious about the history with this guy by TWX · · Score: 1

    I'm a bit curious as to this guy's history given the technology used to find him. Seems like a questionable use of resources to nab a busboy. Given that they didn't tell us why he was deported the previous two times I'm curious if they used it simply because he simply was two-time deportee that keeps coming back, or if he had any history of criminal activity involved in any of his deportation orders.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Re; Stingray for a deportation..

      Why is this bad? He was in the USA illegally and shouldn't be here. Some unemployed high school or college kid (which we are neck deep in in this country) could maybe have had that 'busboy' job instead..

      Kudos on ICE on finding him and deporting him.

    2. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      I'd argue that using a Stingray inside the U.S. at all is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whether or not a person agrees with the outcome shouldn't matter at all.

      If they know where he's working, just scoop him up after he gets off of work. If ICE is getting that lazy, maybe they should hire some Mexicans. I've heard they're pretty hard working.

    3. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by bmo · · Score: 1

      Seems like a questionable use of resources to nab a busboy.

      It's more expensive and dangerous to go after members of MS13, instead of Jose Busboy.

      But hey, the CIA needs MS13, so I guess they're just fine.

      http://www.duffelblog.com/2015...

      Gotta fund the unofficial wars /somehow/.

      --
      BMO

    4. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by tsqr · · Score: 1

      I'm a bit curious as to this guy's history given the technology used to find him. Seems like a questionable use of resources to nab a busboy. Given that they didn't tell us why he was deported the previous two times I'm curious if they used it simply because he simply was two-time deportee that keeps coming back, or if he had any history of criminal activity involved in any of his deportation orders.

      This says he was first apprehended in 2005, but wasn't deported (the first time) until 2012. Possibly when he was first snagged he was released with an order to appear for a hearing, and then skipped the hearing; this is fairly common with the "catch and release" protocol that's been in use for some time. But that's just a guess.

      When you say, "I'm curious if they used it simply because he simply was two-time deportee that keeps coming back, or if he had any history of criminal activity involved in any of his deportation orders," are you taking the position that the crime of illegal entry doesn't count as illegal activity?

      The first time a person is caught for illegal entry, it's a federal misdemeanor. If the person is deported and re-enters illegally it's a federal felony, and that usually results in immediate deportation, which happened in 2014. He re-entered illegally again, and DHS caught him because of his involvement in a hit-and-run incident, and that's when the Stingray was used. So no, he wasn't deported for taking a citizen's busboy job.

    5. Re: Curious about the history with this guy by bmo · · Score: 1

      Aw shit...

      I got Poe's Lawed.

      Oh well, fuckit.

      The main point still stands.

      --
      BMO

    6. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by TWX · · Score: 1

      Where did I say anything about taking a citizen's job?

      I was curious if, besides illegal entry, he did anything wrong. He did. Based on what additional information you've provided I wonder if he close to leave the scene of an accident because of fear of being deported again if he spoke with police, during this particular episode of illegal entry.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    7. Re: Curious about the history with this guy by bmo · · Score: 1

      Then foe me, and never see my posts again.

      Thanks.

      --
      BMO

    8. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Cost vs benefit analysis needed.

      How many man-hours of investigator time plus the cost of the equipment used plus whatever else is involved that we don't know about vs the value of that crap-job to the citizen who should have had it.

      Don't forget to include the value of the jobs lost vs. saved due to this actions effect on the perception of whether the law is being enforced or ignored by the authorities.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    9. Re:Curious about the history with this guy by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      I expect they set up stingrays near locations commonly used by illegals and set it to scan for known illegals phone numbers (imsi catcher), and give an alert when found. This would be a simple and effective way to find lots of illegals, and more selective than having traffic stops to check for "Mexican" looking drivers.

  5. DUI and hit and run are not serious crimes? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Informative

    >> "only brushes with the law involve drunken driving allegations and a hit-and-run crash"

    Um...if the dude's that dangerous, yes, please, kick him out. There are plenty of cooks that aren't threats to innocent people.

    1. Re:DUI and hit and run are not serious crimes? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I think your vehicle should be taken from you and not returned after you get to 4 DWIs. Same with texting while driving.

      This is in addition to all the standard mandatory counseling and jail time they normally get at that stage.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    2. Re:DUI and hit and run are not serious crimes? by DaHat · · Score: 1

      *Only* 4 DWIs?

    3. Re:DUI and hit and run are not serious crimes? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      On your 4th offense and every one thereafter.

      For whatever reason it's a widely accepted and any less than 3 offenses people will try to defend them driving drunk but by the fourth offense at least imho it's indefensible.

      Something should have been done after the first three you shouldn't be able to get to four without a lot of dedication.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    4. Re:DUI and hit and run are not serious crimes? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I'm just talking about dwis in general but as far as illegals driving they should be subject to to traffic laws just the same as any citizen.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  6. Need to fix cell phone protocols by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact that such a device exists is clear evidence that the protocols for cellular phones need to be fixed so that they will only connect to a master list of cellular towers that are in specific locations. What you may not know about cellular phones is that much more than this is possible. You can push an "update' from a tower to your cell phone and it's all done without any consent. Even if you have the latest security focused Blackphone, your phone will still accept any update pushed to your phone by any tower. The reason for this is that the baseband modem functions independently and always trusts that the network is not compromised.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Need to fix cell phone protocols by buss_error · · Score: 1

      will only connect to a master list of cellular towers

      Then they'd just order the cell site operators to include their stingray devices as "allowed". While there are security issues with the cell network, the biggest issue is unrestrained "law enforcement" breaking the law themselves.

      --
      Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
    2. Re:Need to fix cell phone protocols by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      will only connect to a master list of cellular towers

      Then they'd just order the cell site operators to include their stingray devices as "allowed".

      Which is why you would include GPS info about each tower. It's also why you would only update that list every few months, so it wouldn't be something they could push to your phone.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  7. FBI track people doing illegal stuff with warrant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How is that news? I'm fine with the FBI using whatever they can to track illegal acts regardless of them being an illegal immigrant or something else.
    I'm an immigrant myself - as in not an American citizen living in the US. Do you know how much it takes to move to the US legally?

    Why would people be able to enter illegally and get away with it. Because feelings? Talk about privilege..

    The people make the country. People who can't follow rules and due process will also do anything to get by and produce much less than they consume - which means lower GDP at the end of the day. That's why we have third worlds and first worlds. And yes -being born in another country might put you as a disadvantage. Even with all the education in the world, if your culture is fucked up and you lived in it since birth these things are engraved irreversibly in your brain - western culture, it turns out, is the one that gets the closest to equality of opportunities though. The people who do not understand that probably think people migrate to the US because it's magic land and being on it's soil magically make your happy and wealthy. They also probably never had to wonder if they'll die tomorrow because and only fight against it because it make them feel good. How selfish.

    I don't know or heard of a single person that lived through that which did not agree on these fundamentals. zero. that includes the illegal immigrants.

  8. Re: FBI track people doing illegal stuff with warr by getuid() · · Score: 1

    "Follow the rules and you'll be fine" rhetoric - check.

    "Work builds character" rhetoric - check.

    "Equal chances" bull$h1t - check.

    "Cultural supremacy 'cuz we fucking deserve it" BS - check.

    "I know I'm right because I used to be one of $THEM, but then I saw the light" - BINGO!

  9. Re:Equivalency by DaHat · · Score: 1

    You should talk to the FCC about that then.

  10. Re: There are "security issues" with POTS too by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Stingray wiretaps and stores all traffic in a locality. So its more like the agent wiretapping every phone in a ten block area.

  11. Re: FBI track people doing illegal stuff with warr by sexconker · · Score: 1

    The person in question was involved with DUIs and a hit and run.
    I'm find with expending some resources to round him up.

    The fact that he's an illegal immigrant just means he'll be deported (yet again) instead being incarcerated here.

  12. They're illegals - not undocumented. by sethstorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is no defense for allowing illegals in this country, much less the crimes they commit.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:They're illegals - not undocumented. by Required+Snark · · Score: 1
      Crimes like paying taxes (Social Security, unemployment) and not getting any benefits from those tax dollars.

      You are obviously in the Representative Steve King (R Iowa) wing of the Republican Party: "For every one who's a valedictorian, there's another 100 out there who weigh 130 pounds—and they've got calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert."

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    2. Re:They're illegals - not undocumented. by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      come on, a low-wage worker has some hundreds deducted, but has a "right" to 100s of thousands in education and healthcare, besides whatever else they draw from tax-funded anti-American groups. Even those activist admit that Americans will support foreigners for at least two generations.

  13. A few questions by currently_awake · · Score: 1

    Stingrays transmit on licensed frequencies, that are legally restricted to a specific phone company. It's illegal for anyone else to use them. Without a warrant I don't see how the police can legally ignore federal law and use those frequencies. Stingrays work by intercepting phone calls (voice and meta-data) and re-routing them through their equipment. How can they tap phones without a warrant?