Cell carriers have disclosed that they get on average several hundred "requests" a day from Federal, state and local officials for such cell-phone information as the phone's location history, call logs and the contents of text messages. Most of this monitoring of citizen whereabouts lacks a legitimate search warrant signed by a judge.
How do the officers manage to bypass the system of checks and balances provided by the standard warrant process? Labeling the vast majority of the demands "emergencies", of course, to the tune of about 84,000 of them a year to AT&T alone.
"Are there really that many circumstances that justify invoking emergency privileges?"
Of course not.
Sure it's easier to catch some criminals by coercing phone companies into turning over their phone data. It would also be much simpler to, say, just break into their house when they're not around and gather the evidence needed for a conviction. That doesn't make either method lawful.
It's past time for the public to send a clear message to the government (via the voting booth rather than by text) that this kind of data is indeed protected by the Fourth Amendment in exactly the same way as any other information that might pass between a private company and an individual customer.
Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts
Monday, July 09, 2012
Monday, July 11, 2011
We have ways of making you talk
The Department of Justice is arguing that forcing a criminal suspect to give up the password to an encrypted hard drive does not constitute a violation of a person's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Oh, come on.
We're not sticking up for the suspects in this particular case, but rather the next law-abiding person who is ordered to turn over their computer for a search (including demanding login details) despite a complete lack of evidence to justify such a fishing expedition, a practice that happens on a daily basis at customs checkpoints both here and abroad. Here's how to protect your data and private information from such snoops.
"Prosecutors stressed that they don't actually require the passphrase itself, meaning [Ramona] Fricosu would be permitted to type it in and unlock the files without anyone looking over her shoulder."
Oh, come on.
Declan McCullagh of CNET makes a good point in his article - if investigators instead had found some sort of journal or diary written in code, would they then be justified in making the suspect provide a translation against his or her will? Of course not, and if such a key was involuntarily obtained one would also never be sure that what the person provided was indeed accurate. A mentally-held password should not be handled any differently. For that matter, what if the defendant really did forget the phrase? Should someone get jail time for sincerely having a poor memory?
We're not sticking up for the suspects in this particular case, but rather the next law-abiding person who is ordered to turn over their computer for a search (including demanding login details) despite a complete lack of evidence to justify such a fishing expedition, a practice that happens on a daily basis at customs checkpoints both here and abroad. Here's how to protect your data and private information from such snoops.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Massive potential for (and thus a virtual guarantee of) official abuse
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents — allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention."
Without having to bother with opening a formal investigation or even being required to make a record of why such persons of interest "attracted their attention" in the first place, according to the article.
We are still waiting for someone to point to the section of the Federal code that authorizes all of these shiny new "powers" that of course have absolutely no potential for misuse, just like with those bogus "national security letters" the FBI kept abusing after 9/11. Oh wait, they fixed those:
"Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI general counsel, said the bureau had fixed the problems with the national security letters and had taken steps to make sure they would not recur."
But the agency still refuses to tell us just how that process was "fixed". Somehow we don't feel particularly reassured about this latest policy announcement, and others who know much more than us about the issue don't like it much either:
"The FBI recently briefed several privacy advocates about the coming changes. Among them, Michael German, a former FBI agent who is now a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued it was unwise to further ease restrictions on agents’ power to use potentially intrusive techniques, especially if they lacked a firm reason to suspect someone of wrongdoing."
Keep moving, citizen. Nothing to see here.
Without having to bother with opening a formal investigation or even being required to make a record of why such persons of interest "attracted their attention" in the first place, according to the article.
We are still waiting for someone to point to the section of the Federal code that authorizes all of these shiny new "powers" that of course have absolutely no potential for misuse, just like with those bogus "national security letters" the FBI kept abusing after 9/11. Oh wait, they fixed those:
"Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI general counsel, said the bureau had fixed the problems with the national security letters and had taken steps to make sure they would not recur."
But the agency still refuses to tell us just how that process was "fixed". Somehow we don't feel particularly reassured about this latest policy announcement, and others who know much more than us about the issue don't like it much either:
"The FBI recently briefed several privacy advocates about the coming changes. Among them, Michael German, a former FBI agent who is now a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued it was unwise to further ease restrictions on agents’ power to use potentially intrusive techniques, especially if they lacked a firm reason to suspect someone of wrongdoing."
Keep moving, citizen. Nothing to see here.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
The Jack-Booted Thug(s) of the Week...
... are the Michigan State Police troopers who apparently have been routinely hoovering up all of the data from the cell phones of motorists stopped for routine traffic violations in that state:
"A US Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections."
And what search warrant authorized such a We fail to see how getting a ticket for speeding or an improper lane change justifies such a draconian fishing expedition into someone's private business.
Furthermore, when the local ACLU made a simple records request seeking to find out more about this 4th Amendment-violating practice, the MSP responded with an outrageous demand for $544,680 in fees before they would release any information.
"'Law enforcement officers are known, on occasion, to encourage citizens to cooperate if they have nothing to hide,' ACLU staff attorney Mark P. Fancher wrote. 'No less should be expected of law enforcement, and the Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure.'"
Silly Mr. Fancher. He should know by now that there are two sets of rules - one for the "special people" and another for the rest of the unwashed peasants.
Don't make it easy on these sorts of abusive "authorities" - encrypt the data on your phones and other mobile devices. A quick Internet search will turn up software and instructions on how to easily do accomplish that task on any brand of product.
"A US Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections."
And what search warrant authorized such a We fail to see how getting a ticket for speeding or an improper lane change justifies such a draconian fishing expedition into someone's private business.
Furthermore, when the local ACLU made a simple records request seeking to find out more about this 4th Amendment-violating practice, the MSP responded with an outrageous demand for $544,680 in fees before they would release any information.
"'Law enforcement officers are known, on occasion, to encourage citizens to cooperate if they have nothing to hide,' ACLU staff attorney Mark P. Fancher wrote. 'No less should be expected of law enforcement, and the Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure.'"
Silly Mr. Fancher. He should know by now that there are two sets of rules - one for the "special people" and another for the rest of the unwashed peasants.
Don't make it easy on these sorts of abusive "authorities" - encrypt the data on your phones and other mobile devices. A quick Internet search will turn up software and instructions on how to easily do accomplish that task on any brand of product.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)