General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDocuments Reveal Unregulated Use of Stingrays in California
Local law enforcement agencies across the Bay Area have so-called stingray devices, a powerful cellphone surveillance tool, and more are planning to acquire the technology, according to public records recently obtained by Sacramento News10. The devices are highly intrusive and completely unregulated. Although the Wall Street Journal reported in 2011 that they were being used by the federal government, the News10 records reveal for the first time that these devices are also in widespread use by local authorities stretching from San José to Sacramento. The revelations are troubling. Once again, we see the proliferation of powerful new surveillance tools, but without any rules to constrain their use. The acquisition of these devices is shrouded in secrecy and driven by federal grant money, which undermines local democratic oversight. Their actual use by local law enforcement reflects the all too common phenomenon of mission creep: Although the justification for acquiring these devices is fighting terrorism, agencies seem to be using them for ordinary criminal law enforcement.
Whats a stingray and what are the Fourth Amendment implications?
A stingray is a device that mimics a cell tower and thereby tricks all wireless devices on the same network into communicating with it. From a privacy perspective, this is worrying because it collects information about the devices and whereabouts of innocent third parties, not just the target of an investigation. In addition, it can pinpoint targets with extraordinary precision, meaning that individuals can be tracked even when they are inside their homes. Although some of the devices sold in this country are configured not to capture the content of communications, many offered for sale by surveillance vendors can be used for eavesdropping.
There is a real question as to whether stingrays can ever be used in a constitutional fashion. They are the electronic equivalent of dragnet general searches prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. But unfortunately, there are currently no statutes or regulations that specifically address how and under what circumstances stingrays can be used, and very little caselaw.
The San José documents are interesting for a few reasons:
Stingrays come with a hefty price tag. The San José Police Department purchased one or more stingrays (the invoices are heavily redacted, so we cant tell how many units were purchased) in 2013 for $249,837.50, spending another $182,169.09 on training that year. The funds came from the U.S. Department of Homeland Securitys Urban Areas Security Initiative.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/documents-reveal-unregulated-use-stingrays-california
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)xchrom
(108,903 posts)antiquie
(4,299 posts)marble falls
(57,063 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)in this new technological age. And we need people who really understand the technology and care about the constitution doing this.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)C'mon. You know you were thinking it too.
Sid