Jeff McDonald reported in today's (1/14/2016 )San Diego Union Tribune that the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) has been very slow to comply fully with the state law that requires them to publicly post information about their use of 'Stingray' cell phone tracking systems they use. The Stingray systems are mobile devices that allow the user to intercept cell phone calls and track the user's locations. Stingray systems also allow the user to disrupt, or block phone calls from specific cell phones. They can force cell phones to increase their transmitter power, force them to use weaker encryption keys, and, with that information, can actually listen in on cell phone calls.
The Federal Government encouraged local governments to acquire and use the devices by offering generous "grants to help them buy the devices from Harris Corp. Apparently the Department of Homeland Security and FBI are behind that effort. The article says 17 states are using the devices. I suspect that more states are using them without their citizen's knowledge, and given that the Federal agencies are pushing the state and local police to use them, probably the NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS, ATF, Border Patrol, etc are also using the devices.
Of course the agencies justify their use of these devices to protect America from terrorists. But I suspect their primary use is simply to track and catch recreational drug smugglers and marketers as part of their endless (and very profitable)"war on drugs."
For years, state and local police departments have been using stingray systems to track and eavesdrop on citizens without wiretap approvals, or warrants. I'm sure all of those agencies knew that the use of the systems was against the law, and against the basic premises of our US Constitution, but they felt their "higher purpose" (war on drugs) was an end that justified the use of these means. I'm sure they can claim they caught some "bad guys" using stingrays, and they may also claim that there have only been a few "abuses" of the systems. But who knows? What kind of checks and balances have been built into the use of the systems to verify that some police officer might not have tracked his wife or girlfriend? How do we know someone hasn't used it to get information about a political opponent or business competitor?
The State of California Government wanted to put some controls on this technology to reduce the chance of abuse. Senate Bill 741 was signed into law on October 8 2015 which makes it a crime to possess or use such a tracking device without going through the procedures defined in the law. Police have already had 3 months to comply with the law, but according to this article, most have only paid lip service to the law, and have not complied with the intent and spirit of it. I'm pretty sure that if I had and used such a device myself, I would probably have the device confiscated, be arrested and thrown in jail under this law. But, of course, the police can take their time to comply with the law. They clearly do not want the public to know that they are using the device, who they share the information with (probably all Federal agencies), and how long or where they keep the data they collect. It does make sense to not let the supposed bad guys know about the system, because it would be easy to simply turn off cell phones and not be tracked. Since so many cars now have similar trackable communications systems (such as "On Star," "Ford Order," "Toyota Safety Connect," "Nissan Vehicle Tracking Recovery System - VTRS," or Chrysler's MOPAR Electronic Vehicle Tracking System ), I suspect that these stingray systems can also track vehicles using similar technology, they may also be able to eavesdrop on conversations held within the car. Nobody has seemed to bring that subject up.
This California law affects State and local police agencies, but probably does not affect Federal agencies. So I'm not sure we have a chance of protecting our public's right to privacy with just a state law. George Orwell's "1984" dystopian world came 30 years later than he predicted. And instead of carrying out a continuous war against two other continental alliances, we are carrying out war against "drugs" and "terrorism." Yes, we aren't looking for "thoughtcrimes" but we are trying to identify and stop crimes before they happen. We try to catch people selling chemicals that might be used in fabricating drugs. We try to stop money flow that might happen to be related to drug smuggling or donations to Palestinian causes. We try to stop people from recruiting others to join ISIS fighters. These are all similar to "thoughtcrimes" and now we are using technology to track our citizens without their knowledge.
The Federal Government encouraged local governments to acquire and use the devices by offering generous "grants to help them buy the devices from Harris Corp. Apparently the Department of Homeland Security and FBI are behind that effort. The article says 17 states are using the devices. I suspect that more states are using them without their citizen's knowledge, and given that the Federal agencies are pushing the state and local police to use them, probably the NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS, ATF, Border Patrol, etc are also using the devices.
Of course the agencies justify their use of these devices to protect America from terrorists. But I suspect their primary use is simply to track and catch recreational drug smugglers and marketers as part of their endless (and very profitable)"war on drugs."
For years, state and local police departments have been using stingray systems to track and eavesdrop on citizens without wiretap approvals, or warrants. I'm sure all of those agencies knew that the use of the systems was against the law, and against the basic premises of our US Constitution, but they felt their "higher purpose" (war on drugs) was an end that justified the use of these means. I'm sure they can claim they caught some "bad guys" using stingrays, and they may also claim that there have only been a few "abuses" of the systems. But who knows? What kind of checks and balances have been built into the use of the systems to verify that some police officer might not have tracked his wife or girlfriend? How do we know someone hasn't used it to get information about a political opponent or business competitor?
The State of California Government wanted to put some controls on this technology to reduce the chance of abuse. Senate Bill 741 was signed into law on October 8 2015 which makes it a crime to possess or use such a tracking device without going through the procedures defined in the law. Police have already had 3 months to comply with the law, but according to this article, most have only paid lip service to the law, and have not complied with the intent and spirit of it. I'm pretty sure that if I had and used such a device myself, I would probably have the device confiscated, be arrested and thrown in jail under this law. But, of course, the police can take their time to comply with the law. They clearly do not want the public to know that they are using the device, who they share the information with (probably all Federal agencies), and how long or where they keep the data they collect. It does make sense to not let the supposed bad guys know about the system, because it would be easy to simply turn off cell phones and not be tracked. Since so many cars now have similar trackable communications systems (such as "On Star," "Ford Order," "Toyota Safety Connect," "Nissan Vehicle Tracking Recovery System - VTRS," or Chrysler's MOPAR Electronic Vehicle Tracking System ), I suspect that these stingray systems can also track vehicles using similar technology, they may also be able to eavesdrop on conversations held within the car. Nobody has seemed to bring that subject up.
This California law affects State and local police agencies, but probably does not affect Federal agencies. So I'm not sure we have a chance of protecting our public's right to privacy with just a state law. George Orwell's "1984" dystopian world came 30 years later than he predicted. And instead of carrying out a continuous war against two other continental alliances, we are carrying out war against "drugs" and "terrorism." Yes, we aren't looking for "thoughtcrimes" but we are trying to identify and stop crimes before they happen. We try to catch people selling chemicals that might be used in fabricating drugs. We try to stop money flow that might happen to be related to drug smuggling or donations to Palestinian causes. We try to stop people from recruiting others to join ISIS fighters. These are all similar to "thoughtcrimes" and now we are using technology to track our citizens without their knowledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I am interested in hearing other viewpoints or corrections to my posts