Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: AZRedhawk44 on April 20, 2011, 12:28:40 AM
-
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenewspaper.com%2Frlc%2Fpix%2Fcellebrite.jpg&hash=3536a2561c330a95b2b9e8f4f125662273bfd3e2)
"Complete extraction of existing, hidden, and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images, and geotags," a CelleBrite brochure explains regarding the device's capabilities. "The Physical Analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth. In addition, location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps."
For a traffic stop.
A frakking traffic stop.
Facebook isn't enough, evidently. Unhappy with the cross-reference capabilities of the NSA datamining your email inbox via Facebook (which most of dumb America voluntarily allowed), they are now forcibly taking your smartphone by proxy of State Troopers in MI, using vendor-firmware backdoors, and cross-referencing dumb America's tendency to integrate Facebook crap on their phone, into contact lists (with phone numbers, addresses, names, text conversations, etc).
Hey, whatever protects us from terrorism. :facepalm:
If you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to worry about. [barf]
-
I saw this story a few minutes ago. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out with the ACLU up in arms over it. Them popos are putting some serious dents in the 4th.
-
Use encryption. Load up your phone with plenty of inaccurate information. And consider installing a locking compartment in your vehicle. Put your money, cell phone, etc in it. Under existing and legal asset seizure laws, it's not just your cell phone that they can arrest. No, I'm not bloody kidding. It is legal to arrest inanimate objects.
It's obviously blatantly unconstitutional, and a bad idea in general. I doubt this will be the last we'll see of it.
-
This *expletive deleted* *expletive deleted* has been going on since 2008!!!!??!!!!!
It's not just smartphones...it's all phones, such as my GZOne Boulder and then even the previous generation of "dumb" phones we used to use...
What. The. *expletive deleted*.??!!??
And yet people just do that little, stupid laugh when you try to talk about the ever increasing police state...
-
Under what imagined authority do they believe they can do this? The Fourth Amendment would seem to be a hard/fast bright line in this case - a "Nope. Ain't happ'nin," kinda thing. And it says in the article that it can defeat password protection, too? How the hell is this legal? And how can MISP justify charging ACLU *HALF A MILLION DOLLARS* to respond to their request for records of the use of the device? Turnabout's fair play, here, IMO - if MISP has done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to hide and should provide the requested information.
The phrase "police state" is getting thrown around more and more these days. There's a reason for that, IMO.
-
Help me understand this. Are the Michigan cops asking/saying "If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't mind letting us do this"? Or are they saying "We will do this regardless of your objection"?
If folks are dumb enough to allow this then they pretty much deserve what happens. If the cops are telling folks they must submit then there may not be enough lampposts in the state.
stay safe.
-
Move along. Nothing to see here. Just good ole cops who want to go home at the end of their shift. Those evil cell phones might prevent that.
This, IMO, is just further conformation that police, in attitude and action, think that they are a different class, better than other animals.
-
Hmmm . . . two phones . . . one real phone you'll hide, then a decoy phone, hopefully loaded with plenty of bogus information that incriminates varioius public officials, or a virus that will infect the Physical Analyzer . . .
-
The article didn't mention it, so what is the point of downloading the phone data? What are the cops trying to accomplish? How does the data help the police to "serve and protect?"
-
Hmmm . . . two phones . . . one real phone you'll hide, then a decoy phone, hopefully loaded with plenty of bogus information that incriminates varioius public officials, or a virus that will infect the Physical Analyzer . . .
There probably is a current law, or soon will be, against having a decoy phone. It might even fall under the umbrella of hiding evidence.
-
Help me understand this. Are the Michigan cops asking/saying "If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't mind letting us do this"? Or are they saying "We will do this regardless of your objection"?
No idea. I was pulled over by a MSP trooper about a month ago and nothing was said about my cell phone.
Or the loaded Glock in the glovebox. :)
-
Under what imagined authority do they believe they can do this?
Probably "officer safety", or perhaps "fighting trrrism", or "War on Drugs". Those seem to be the magic incantations that cause judges to say "that seems reasonable" and let the cops do whatever they want. And if it ever doesn't work, the only penalty is suppression of the evidence that they would not have obtained other wise.
-
I wonder if MI has a law banning texting while driving like we have in WI?
Wouldn't surprise me if they use a somewhat innocuous law that nobody follows as a pretext to snooping your phone contents. [barf]
-
Hey, I read the article, and I'm kind of confused...how did we get from buying some equipment to using it on motorists during minor traffic stops? Did I miss something in the article? Seriously, point it out if I did miss something, because from what I just read, the author assumes that because it can be used on a motorist stopped for a traffic offense, that's what it's for. Using the same logic, my local PD just bought a pair of new suppressed MP-5's to shoot children on the playground who bully other children.
On a serious note, the Supreme Court has ruled that if an officer expands a traffic stop beyond the offense, the officer must have a reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activit (Terry vs. Ohio standard), of the officer must inform the motorist he/she is free to go, and then request consent to expand the stop. best response I've ever seen to such a request is "I'd love to cooperate with you, officer, but I'm on a schedule, and the traffic stop kind of threw that off a bit, so I can't afford to be here any longer."
Personally, if you wanna hook up my smartphone, I'm requesting to see the warrant. Yes, I may end up in cuffs, but that's what I'm gonna do.
-
I wonder if MI has a law banning texting while driving like we have in WI?
Yep, brand spanking new law. It's a primary offense too.
-
Chris,
Here is a little bit of a different article on the subject. It claims that the devices have already been used to download stopped motorists.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/27564088/detail.html (http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/27564088/detail.html)
-
known of cops mining cellphones in dope cases. and in one kid disappearance. never eard of it at aa simple traffic stop. a stop with a k of coke in the trunk yea
-
EMP generator in your drivers door, plus a copper mesh cell phone envelope.
Problem solved.
-
EMP generator in your drivers door, plus a copper mesh cell phone envelope.
Problem solved.
Why not just modify a smartphone with a nice fat electrolytic cap, some charge pump circuitry, and dump 30V at like 100A across all the data pins on the USB if a code isn't included. Warn the police. "sir, my phone is a special phone and will likely not work with your equipment, and may cause damage". Cop plugs in device, fries his Orwell-a-tron. Repeat as necessary, preferably while recording it. Observe how many times police connect phone to various equipment, estimate IQ as 100/number of times. I wonder if you could be charged for that if you didn't give them permission, and warned them.
-
Why not just modify a smartphone with a nice fat electrolytic cap, some charge pump circuitry, and dump 30V at like 100A across all the data pins on the USB if a code isn't included. Warn the police. "sir, my phone is a special phone and will likely not work with your equipment, and may cause damage". Cop plugs in device, fries his Orwell-a-tron. Repeat as necessary, preferably while recording it. Observe how many times police connect phone to various equipment, estimate IQ as 100/number of times. I wonder if you could be charged for that if you didn't give them permission, and warned them.
Surgically alter the USB pin-outs on your phone, then mod a custom charging and data cable back at home.
It won't fry the device.
But the device won't read it, either.
ETA: Add a switch to the mod, so that the pinouts can be standard based on one switch position, and nonstandard in the other.
Or, use a custom wire translating harness between the nonstandard phone USB port and the standard USB cable.
-
No, birdman's right. We want to break their toys.
His idea is more elegant then mine, but mine has the added fun of maybe getting the officer's personal cell phone in the pulse. Need a big cap though. I've seen ~3F 12V caps for car audio applications. We only need a couple feet range. And maybe a directional antenna.
-
No, birdman's right. We want to break their toys.
His idea is more elegant then mine, but mine has the added fun of maybe getting the officer's personal cell phone in the pulse. Need a big cap though. I've seen ~3F 12V caps for car audio applications. We only need a couple feet range. And maybe a directional antenna.
Those caps aren't suitable to drive an HPM, their internal resistance is too high (too long of a pulse). With the proper pulse forming, they might be useful for an initial stage. Also, most sources require relatively high voltage.
-
Why not just modify a smartphone with a nice fat electrolytic cap, some charge pump circuitry, and dump 30V at like 100A across all the data pins on the USB if a code isn't included. Warn the police. "sir, my phone is a special phone and will likely not work with your equipment, and may cause damage". Cop plugs in device, fries his Orwell-a-tron. Repeat as necessary, preferably while recording it. Observe how many times police connect phone to various equipment, estimate IQ as 100/number of times. I wonder if you could be charged for that if you didn't give them permission, and warned them.
Nice.
I'm guessing an IQ of 50.
-
Nice.
I'm guessing an IQ of 50.
Too kind, I bet they'd fry the first one, the one in the cruiser who showed up for backup, and the one at the station. And I bet that would still happen if you warned them each time.
-
EMP generator in your drivers door, plus a copper mesh cell phone envelope.
Problem solved.
I was thinking more of mounting the EMP on the rear of my truck facing the police cruiser....fry the toys before they even leave the vehicle.... :cool:
-
I was thinking more of mounting the EMP on the rear of my truck facing the police cruiser....fry the toys before they even leave the vehicle.... :cool:
Why not just trigger it as you drive by the speed trap?
-
I don't see why everyone is getting there knickers in a twist over this.
The founding fathers never imagined cell phones so how could they be covered under the 4th Amendment?
=D
-
^ A verrrry pointed remark.
-
Someone needs to program an app that automatically finds and downloads pictures of cop's wife/mom when you enter a badge number. >:D
-
The police that have used this machine need a refresher on the 4th Amend. Also need to be fired. If anyone that is in LE thinks this is a good thing to use, or thinks its bad but just doesnt say something. You are part of the problem.
-
i am looking for an example of some real person this has been used on, in an illegal manner. anyone got one? i checked alex jones he had bupkus
-
i am looking for an example of some real person this has been used on, in an illegal manner. anyone got one? i checked alex jones he had bupkus
Good luck finding anything, but there has to be a reason the MSP is stonewalling the FOIA requests.
-
i am looking for an example of some real person this has been used on, in an illegal manner. anyone got one? i checked alex jones he had bupkus
Spot me $500k and I'll get you the reports of it being used.
-
Good luck finding anything, but there has to be a reason the MSP is stonewalling the FOIA requests.
Spot me $500k and I'll get you the reports of it being used.
Ayup. My horse sense tells me that if there wasn't dirt to FOIA, there would be no great obstables to getting the FOIA'd data.
Citizens, too, can use their experience to note squirrelly behavior of potential thugs, just as LEOs can.
-
so thats a no then?
-
so thats a no then?
lack of evidence =/= evidence of lack.
It's not my job to dig up every detail. You're the one trying to convince all of us that it's no big deal. You provide the MSP's usage policy and evidence of training on said policy. You prove that they have some pressing real need to get this data on the side of the road, vs with a warrant and lab. Otherwise it's like a 5 year old with a gun. Sure the worst might not happen, but it's still a stupid idea.
-
i would like to see an example of what has been done. surely with the countries best minds working the issue someone has one case? wnd? newsmax? prison planet?
-
Ayup. My horse sense tells me that if there wasn't dirt to FOIA, there would be no great obstables to getting the FOIA'd data.
If they have nothing to hide, then why are they so afraid of public inquiry?
-
There's that double standard again csd. Cop shoots someone you assume the shootee was at fault unless supply the evidence, cops stonewall foia request about new toy that violates the fourth and we gotta prove it's being misused... How we're supposed to do that when the cops are refusing foia requests is an open question. And of course list questionable news sources (who by your own admission aren't in any way connected to the story) in an attempt to smear via guilt by (non-existent) association. That's just weak man.
Chris: when the Patriot Act was passed I knew it would be abused long before the first meth lab was called a wmd.
-
i would like to see an example of what has been done.
That's your problem.
The fact that they have the ability, coupled with law enforcement's tendency to push limits when they think they can is enough for me to be unhappy. The fact that they seem unwilling to share the details of it's use to date is just icing on the cake of "They're up to something"
-
The fact that they seem unwilling to share the details of it's use to date is just icing on the cake of "They're up to something"
What "they" are up to? Up to their arse in trouble. That's why they are having "troubles" with the FOIA requests. Keep it in the dark as long as possible, maybe it will go away. I sure hope not. And I hope each and every person involved, from the cop on the street, the LE admin that approved to the maker of the extraction device gets sued out of house, home, and their children's college fund. Then I hope for criminal charges, violation of civil rights under color of law.
-
The title to this thread is misleading - it implies that this device is used routinely, which I can't see any evidence of.
There is definitely something embarrassing in that FOI material. Doubly embarrassing is that they need to use the bill to withhold it, which says they did something shady and didn't consider how to keep it out of FOI (which no self-respecting gov't official ever does - it's a hallmark of professional incompetence.)
-
so... whats the name of that guy who had their smart phone downloaded? during a routine traffic stop? not being a big fan of "it coulda happened that way"
-
How can i put this without giving up to much info......... =|
Why does Michigan Police have NSA equipment and using out in the open ? :facepalm:
-
Why does Michigan Police have NSA equipment and using out in the open ?
Don't go putting logic out there like that. It will make LEOs and their groupies heads explods. They think this evolving police state is a good thing, and they will always give the benefit of the doubt to LE. That is backwards as our founders saw it. The benefit of the doubt goes to the individual/citizen.
The $500K they wanted for the FOIA request was probably going to purchase more of this equipment.
It would be pretty simple to put this issue away. Release the info of the FOIA request. It must be pretty damning against LE. Or they would have issued a statement or complied with the FOIA request by now.
-
It must be pretty damning
presumes
-
Let me repeat myself:
The fact that they have the ability, coupled with law enforcement's tendency to push limits when they think they can is enough for me to be unhappy.
-
FTR MSP's statement on the device is here (http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1586-254783--,00.html)
Money Paragraph:
The MSP only uses the DEDs if a search warrant is obtained or if the person possessing the mobile device gives consent. The department*s internal directive is that the DEDs only be used by MSP specialty teams on criminal cases, such as crimes against children.
Assuming they get a warrant or consent, they are operating inside existing rules. Eventually our society is going to have to come to terms with the sheer volume of information about our habits that we each generate and store with technology, and either become OK with .gov knowing a lot more then they used to, or give .gov's leash a sharp jerk.
-
consent
The police keep using that word... it's spelled i-n-t-i-m-i-d-a-t-i-o-n =(
-
not so! there are many who will never be cowed, the internet is full of them.
so with consent or warrant? whats the beef again? anyone find the name of that one guy abused by this?
in the real world cops get to ask. you can say no. too stupid or scared? want to run a bluff say yes and count on them not finding what you are hiding? its darwin in the criminal world
-
not so! there are many who will never be cowed, the internet is full of them.
so with consent or warrant? whats the beef again?
One more time, this one's for the cheap seats.
The fact that they have the ability, coupled with law enforcement's tendency to push limits when they think they can is enough for me to be unhappy.
-
you have the right to pursuit of happiness.
your "happiness" is not a right.
so to recap there is no violation?
-
so to recap there is no violation?
Oh, anybody with life experience and no agenda to promote knows there's a violation somewhere. Probably several. It's just that the violators have plenty of practice at dodging, obfuscation, hiding, and lying.
DD
-
you have the right to pursuit of happiness.
your "happiness" is not a right.
so to recap there is no violation?
You seem unclear on how the government works. They work for us. If I'm unhappy, and I can get enough other people unhappy there doesn't need to be a violation. We can change the rules so they can't do that just because enough people were pissed. So we talk about things that make us unhappy with our friends, and them with their friends until we get enough unhappy people, then we make the cops throw away their bad toys.
Secondary purpose:
See that part of my statement about "if they think they can get away with it"? If enough people are pissed and being loud about possible misuse of these devices, then they won't think they can get away with it. This kind of discussion can prevent violations in the unlikely event that they aren't already occurring.
Again, why are you so all-fired determined to give the cops every scrap of power and authority they can grasp?
-
and they can hide it from the aclu? and all the folks on the net?
-
Thanks for the reminder. I forgot to mention their syncophants, defenders, and other assorted broken records. :-*
DD
-
and they can hide it from the aclu? and all the folks on the net?
They have in the past.
-
really? could you be more specific? bearing in mind the peculiar fact that were they , in fact, successful we would not know about it at all.
-
bearing in mind the peculiar fact that were they , in fact, successful we would not know about it at all.
QED!
DD
-
I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you. ;)
-
Lessee... MISP wants to charge the ACLU a half million to respond to the FOIA request.
Per http://www.rcfp.org/fogg/index.php?i=pt2 (http://www.rcfp.org/fogg/index.php?i=pt2)
Paying fees
Agencies may charge “reasonable” fees for the “direct” costs of searching for and copying the records you request, unless you are entitled to fee benefits or waivers. (For instance, representatives of the news media do not pay search fees; see below.) Search fees generally range from $11 to $28 per hour, based on the salary and benefits of the employee doing the search. Fees for computer time, which are described in each agency’s FOIA regulations, vary greatly. They may be as high as $270 per hour. Photocopying costs are normally between 3 and 25 cents per page.
Search fees may be charged even if few or no documents are located in response to your request. Unless you are requesting information for a commercial use, agencies may not charge you for the time they spend examining files to determine what individual documents should be exempt from disclosure or for deleting material in those documents. News media requests are not considered “commercial” uses.
A “representative of the news media” is a person or entity that gathers and disseminates information of current interest to the public. In addition to traditional broadcasters and periodicals, it encompasses freelance journalists and sometimes bloggers if they “can demonstrate a solid basis for expecting publication” with a particular news-media entity, which might include a blog.
I could make an argument that the ACLU would qualify to be exempt from search charges. Given that, let's say they're charged $1.00 per page copied. I'll go 4 to 33 times the "normal" charge per copy just in case there is a charge for searching. They should offset each other somewhat.
That still means that a half million would produce a stack of paper about 160 feet tall to deny what is alleged.
Yeah. The MISP is being forthright and open. :P
DD
-
Actually, all joking aside.
A time where Law Enforcement broke the law to infringe someone's rights, and kept it secret, but it came out later so we would know about it.
.
hmmm.
.
Well, there's this (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=29022.0)
-
so to recap again. the title is misleading? and there is as yet not a single instance of the alleged abue happening? i mean in real life as opposed to some feverish fantasy?
-
Would someone please put a nickel on the tonearm? The record is stuck again... =D
DD
-
you have the right to pursuit of happiness.
your "happiness" is not a right.
so to recap there is no violation?
:facepalm: ;/
so to recap again. the title is misleading? and there is as yet not a single instance of the alleged abue happening? i mean in real life as opposed to some feverish fantasy?
Well, some people are trying to find out and give us hard proof, but the MSP is stonewalling a legit FOIA request with bull*expletive deleted*, which pretty much indicates they really don't want something to see the light of day. If they had nothing to hide, they would have complied...(or at least, that's what the cops tell people like you and me). No one here has claimed a "feverish fantasy" as you suggest. These are very legitimate concerns...
-
Again, you provide evidence beyond "Oh I been around, I just kinda know the guy had it coming" in bad shoot threads, we'll (after the cops get done stonewalling foia requests) provide evidence of police mis handling in these kind of threads.
Again, just as stonewalling foia requests is a sign of guilt, so is your hypocritical BS in any threads involving cops. Nice try, but we've seen your act and know how it ends.
-
Again, you provide evidence beyond "Oh I been around, I just kinda know the guy had it coming" in bad shoot threads, we'll (after the cops get done stonewalling foia requests) provide evidence of police mis handling in these kind of threads.
Again, just as stonewalling foia requests is a sign of guilt, so is your hypocritical BS in any threads involving cops. Nice try, but we've seen your act and know how it ends.
was there a specific cop shooting you were looking for evidence on? how about scott in las vegas?
in this thread we start with an allegation that this is being done on routine traffic stops. surely in the age of the web one of the "victims" would come forward by now with their story. or is this folks channeling charlene drew jarvis?
tere is a significant difference between offering an opinion and fabricating incidents
-
and they can hide it from the aclu? and all the folks on the net?
So, you're complaining about us doing... the very thing you're holding up as a defense against this sort of misdeed?
:facepalm:
-
So, you're complaining about us doing... the very thing you're holding up as a defense against this sort of misdeed?
:facepalm:
no i'm complaining about the fabrications. not a lock but most of the times folks who fabricate their "incidents are speaking from an awkward position. it is in fact much like pierre the bridge builder