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.
>> "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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Won't that make America great again?
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
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".
So what is difference? How is citizen dissenter like illegal alien invader?
I think we should refer to drug dealers as "undocumented pharmacists."
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.
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.