ACLU: State Police Using Cellphone 'Extraction' Device..

OFF THE WIRE
DETROIT -- The Michigan chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is questioning the Michigan State Police's use of cellphone "extraction" devices.
The ACLU said MSP has used the devices to access information from cellphones that officers ask drivers they have pulled over to give them.
"It can contain information that many people consider to be private, to be beyond the reach of law enforcement and other government actors," said Mark Fancher, an ACLU attorney.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/27563909/index.html
The ACLU is asking why the state police is using devices that can gather data stored on cellphones, and why it is not telling the public about it. The ACLU said the devices could violate Fourth Amendment rights.
"There is great potential for abuse here by a police officer or a state trooper who may not be monitored or supervised on the street," Fancher said.
MSP released a statement this week that said it is working "in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act."
"The State Police will provide information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act ... there may be a processing fee to search for, retrieve, examine and separate exempt material ... ," MSP said in a statement.
Fancher said MSP priced that information, pertaining to five devices, at about $500,000.
"This should be something that they are handing over freely, and that they should be more than happy to share with the public -- the routines and the guidelines that they follow," Fancher said.
The national ACLU has asked similar questions about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's use of devices to gather information from travelers' computers and cellphones.
Michigan: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops
This is what happens when "You have nothing to hide" and give up your rights.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

Michigan: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops

ACLU seeks information on Michigan program that allows cops to download information from smart phones belonging to stopped motorists.

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan last Wednesday demanded that state officials stop stonewalling freedom of information requests for information on the program.

ACLU learned that the police had acquired the cell phone scanning devices and in August 2008 filed an official request for records on the program, including logs of how the devices were used. The state police responded by saying they would provide the information only in return for a payment of $544,680. The ACLU found the charge outrageous.
"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."

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.
"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."
The ACLU is concerned that these powerful capabilities are being quietly used to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.
"With certain exceptions that do not apply here, a search cannot occur without a warrant in which a judicial officer determines that there is probable cause to believe that the search will yield evidence of criminal activity," Fancher wrote. "A device that allows immediate, surreptitious intrusion into private data creates enormous risks that troopers will ignore these requirements to the detriment of the constitutional rights of persons whose cell phones are searched."

The national ACLU is currently suing the Department of Homeland Security for its policy of warrantless electronic searches of laptops and cell phones belonging to people entering the country who are not suspected of committing any crime.
Michigan police and ACLU in flap over cell phone downloads..
The American Civil Liberties Union said on Thursday it wants to know how the Michigan State Police have been using devices capable of downloading text messages, address books and other data from cell phones.
The Data Extraction Devices are commonly used to transfer data from an old cell phone to a new one, but are also a law enforcement tool for obtaining information such as erased text messages.
The state police said in a statement on Wednesday it will respond to a Freedom of Information Act request from ACLU for information, but that complying costs money.
Police said they are using the devices in certain criminal cases, but after obtaining a search warrant or with the cell phone owner's consent.
"The implication by the ACLU that the (state police) uses these devices 'quietly to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches' is untrue, and this divisive tactic unjustly harms police and community relations," the state police said.
"We only wanted assurances that these devices were being used lawfully," ACLU of Michigan attorney Mark Fancher said in a telephone interview on Thursday, adding that the group had made its first request for the information in 2008.
To comply with the ACLU's initial request, the state police demanded more than $500,000 to cover expenses, the ACLU says.
The requests have since been honed down by the two sides, but the ACLU has yet to get the information it seeks.
"The result has been we're not getting the documents," Fancher said.
He said the devices cost around $3,000 each, and the Michigan State Police have five.
(Reporting by Andrew Stern and Bernie Woodall. Editing by David Bailey and Peter Bohan)
Heads up!! Police Device Used To Steal Your Cell Phone Data During Traffic Stop,FUCK THAT, GET A WARRANT, OR PRY IT FROM MY DEAD COLD HANDS........
You may have heard about the Cellebrite cell phone extraction device (UFED) in the news lately. It gives law enforcement officials the ability to access all the information on your cell phone within a few short minutes. When it became known that Michigan State Police had been using the tool to access cell phones during traffic stops, it raised concern with the ACLU. Now, everyone is wondering if cops will be using devices like this elsewhere. Will this new law enforcement tool be abused, or will it be used responsibly in the pursuit of justice?
Call us paranoid, but we obtained a law-enforcement-grade software extraction tool for the iPhone to see exactly what data is up for grabs. You'd be surprised to see just how much data today's smartphones can store -- and police can access.

Comment
WHAT THE FUCK,
I think that the cops need to stay out of the cell phone tapping business. I have nothing to hid, just feel like all my rights are slowly being taken away from me. I must wear a helmet while riding my Harley, Seat belts are a must, can't use my phone while driving, now Cops can check my phone that I am not using while driving. what sense does that make? FUCK THAT, GET A WARRANT, OR PRY IT FROM MY DEAD COLD HANDS........
Author: George Orwell, Book: 1984. If you haven't read it, you must have skipped junior high and went straight into high school. I remember thinking how bizarre Orwells' scenario was, wondering how good men would actually sit still and allow their civil liberties to be trampled. I will never forget Kent State and how the military " men" said " we were just doing our job". It starts out small and grows slowly. Now, " snoopery" encompasses all our lives. I have nothing to hide, but you don't have the right to take it and expose it, accidentally or not, to the masses.
Police Use Cell Phone and Nav Data to Spy on Drivers
Doug Newcomb
Brothers and Sisters...be aware of leaving your cell phone on while traveling long distances. Insurance and Police agencies are tracking your every movement while driving and talking. Even if just riding along with someone else will lessen the medical payout if in a accident? Brother Bikers....you're screwed if you speed from point A to point B and involve in a accident! Insurance company will seek out info how fast you were speeding along?!? Turn off that Damn Silly Fone if not needed!
In recent weeks we learned that Apple and Google are spying on people carrying the companies' smartphones. No big surprise there. But two other paranoia-inducing tech-tracking revelations that came out last week are perhaps more alarming for motorists: State police in Michigan have been collecting data from drivers' cell phones during routine traffic stops, and police in the Netherlands have used data from TomTom navigation systems to catch speeders and also determine the best places to install speed cameras.
It's enough to turn even the most tech-loving driver into a Luddite.
If you're stopped by a state cop in Michigan, you could be asked to hand over your mobile phone along with license and registration. And using a cell phone extraction device from a company called Cellebrite, the law could find out a lot more about you than you ever imagined.
The folks over at Translogic got their hands on a Cellebrite UFED that can grab data from over 1,800 different cell phones. They report that the information -- call history, contacts, text messages, photos and videos, whether they've been deleted or not -- can be downloaded to a USB drive within seconds. Translogic also used a software program called Lantern from Katana Forensics to analyze the data from an iPhone, including locations previously visited and recorded by Google Maps.
The American Civil Liberties Union has been on the case of the Michigan State Police (MSP) for using UFED devices during what the ACLU calls routine traffic stops, and claims that it violates the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure. The ACLU has asked for data from the MSP showing how the devices are used, when they are used and if they've been used without permission.
According to the Los Angeles Times, the MSP has in turn asked for over a half million dollars to cover the costs of retrieving and assembling the necessary documents to comply. Hey, times are tough in Michigan and the state needs the money. The MSP also claims that the UFED devices are used "only if a search warrant is obtained or if the person possessing the mobile device gives consent." What would you say if a cop asked you to hand over your phone?
Traffic cops in the Netherlands have taken a more proactive approach  to snaring speeders and other law breakers -- and left portable navigation device maker TomTom with some explaining to do to its customers. Some of the company's nav systems can send GPS info to TomTom, and the information is used to route drivers around traffic and provide more accurate arrival times.
TomTom also shares the info with the government in the Netherlands, which uses it to analyze traffic congestion and solve safety issues. But the Dutch press revealed that police also used the info to catch lead-footed drivers and as a basis for deciding the best places to install speed cameras.
The data used by the Dutch government didn't include information on individual drivers, and TomTom has barred its further use. The company also released a letter to its customers and the company's CEO made a video explaining the company's position on driver privacy. What he didn't mention is that some of his company's nav system also point out to users where speed cameras are installed.
Sort of makes you think twice about using certain tech behind the wheel. And the wisdom of downloading and installing, say, a smartphone app from an insurance company.
CA - REGION: ACLU seeks police policy on high-tech tracking...
By TERI FIGUEROA tfigueroa@nctimes.com REGION: ACLU seeks police policy on high-tech tracking..........Mike Johnson of Temecula talks on the phone as he looks over a Carlsbad beach Wednesday./JAMIE SCOTT LYTLE/mailto:LYTLE/lytle@nctimes.com...Your smartphone knows where you are. Do the police know, too?
As technology advances, concerns are growing over how law enforcement officers use technology to track people.
Such concerns prompted the national American Civil Liberties Union to ask police in 31 states to turn over information about when, why and how they use cellphone tracking data, such as global positioning service, or GPS.
The ACLU asked 34 affiliate chapters ---- including the San Diego and Imperial counties chapter ---- to request such policies and other data from local law enforcement agencies.
"These are emerging technologies," said David Blair-Loy, staff attorney with the local ACLU chapter. "And with any new technology, it has promise and peril. One of the perils of the new technology as to mobile devices is the increasing potential for government control and surveillance.
"This request is sent out to find out what (police) are doing in this area, and to see if there are any protections and policies in place."
Oceanside and Escondido police say they have received the requests, sent out last week, and are processing them.
Oceanside police don't have specific written policies regarding "the use of covert devices or acquisition of information obtained from cellphone records absent a search warrant; we follow state and federal law," Oceanside police Lt. Leonard Mata said.
In Escondido, police leaders said they are meeting with the city's attorneys this week to go over the ACLU's requests.
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department said it had not gotten the ACLU's request as of Tuesday.
The ACLU, in a statement sent out last week, explained the reasons for the probe into police policy.
"All too often, the government is taking advantage of outdated privacy laws to get its hands on this valuable private information by demanding it without a warrant," the ACLU said.
The civil liberties group said it hopes the requests will reveal how and under what circumstances the government is tracking people.
At issue is the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against illegal search and seizure. Among the questions the ACLU raised is whether the use of tracking technology should require a search warrant.
It's the sort of question that the U.S. Supreme Court will tackle in the coming term, when it looks at a Washington, D.C., case regarding whether police needed a warrant to track a suspect through GPS.
In that case, the ACLU argued during the appeals phase that GPS technology gives police new powers to track people remotely over extended periods.
In Michigan, the ACLU has been locked in battle with police in that state for three years, after it learned the police had "acquired several devices that have the potential to quickly download data from cell phones without the owner of the cell phone even knowing it," the ACLU wrote in an April letter to the Michigan State Police.
Blair-Loy characterized police use of such devices without a search warrant as "extraordinarily chilling."
Then came reports this spring that iPhones kept a record of where the phone was and when it was there. The Wall Street Journal reported that it was unclear why the phones had that capacity, and there was no evidence the information was then sent to Apple, the company behind the iPhone.
In an email Tuesday, Catherine Crump, a staff attorney with the ACLU's main offices in New York City, pointed to both the D.C. case and the iPhone matter and said, "This is a crucial year for deciding how much privacy Americans will enjoy in their movements."
"We are all increasingly aware that our phones can be used to track us," she wrote. She added, "It is important for the public debate that we have a clear and detailed understanding of whether the police are tracking people's cell phones without demonstrating the full probable cause standard."
Probable cause is the level by which police must prove that facts and circumstances exist that would tend to show, by reasonable standards, that a crime has been committed ---- and thus a search or seizure is warranted.
Among the information the ACLU is seeking from police agencies is:
Policies, procedures and practices that law enforcement agents follow to obtain cellphone location records;
How long the information is kept, and who else has access to it;
How often cellphone companies refuse to comply with police requests or orders.
The ACLU plans to gather the information and share it on their website: http://www.aclu.org/maps/your-local-law-enforcement-tracking-your-cell-phones-location.

Read more: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/article_5ba123ca-18bd-5fa9-8dce-1acda7c2e0ca.html#ixzz1UxRPHhMm