Live data from Hacker News

An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

arstechnica.com

11–20 of 51 posts

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#11
post #4

This is the first time I've heard of a pen register, apparently somewhat broad, modern parlance for things that capture phone data. It seems pretty damning that they spent the time to fax MetroPCS but couldn't, ya know, even get the pen register or ask a judge to ask if they thought it was a good idea. Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are s…

The term dates back to 19th-century telegraphy [1]. 18 U.S. Code § 3127 [2] defines them specifically:

    the term “pen register” means a device or process which records or decodes
    dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling information transmitted by an
    instrument or facility from which a wire or electronic communication is
    transmitted, provided, however, that such information shall not include the
    contents of any communication, but such term does not include any device or
    process used by a provider or customer of a wire or electronic communication
    service for billing, or recording as an incident to billing, for
    communications services provided by such provider or any device or process
    used by a provider or customer of a wire communication service for cost
    accounting or other like purposes in the ordinary course of its business;

[1] https://nerdsincourt.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/on-prism-smith...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3127

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#12
post #4

This is the first time I've heard of a pen register, apparently somewhat broad, modern parlance for things that capture phone data. It seems pretty damning that they spent the time to fax MetroPCS but couldn't, ya know, even get the pen register or ask a judge to ask if they thought it was a good idea. Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are s…

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys

The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evidence stand, but hold the cops accountable for their actions through parallel civil and criminal proceedings. The feedback for "cop behavior" is direct vs indirect.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#13
post #4

This is the first time I've heard of a pen register, apparently somewhat broad, modern parlance for things that capture phone data. It seems pretty damning that they spent the time to fax MetroPCS but couldn't, ya know, even get the pen register or ask a judge to ask if they thought it was a good idea. Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are s…

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evi…

Let unconstitutionally acquired exidence stand?

No, let's not let the abuses of a government stand, as we should also go after its agents.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#14
post #8
post #5

If three armed gang members are on the run after shooting someone, and an informant names some suspects, looking up the location of the suspects' phones seems acceptable to me. I have no doubt that stingrays are abused, but this specific instance, even if not legal, is ethical. That said, I do have issues with the OPD's incompetence and the prosecution's attempt at a cover-up. Seriously, why did the officer put himse…

an informant names some suspects, looking up the location of the suspects' phones seems acceptable to me. Wasn't the "secret informant" a wiretap they didn't want subject to legal scrutiny? That's the impression I got from the article?

FTA: "At times, cops have gone as far as to falsely claim the existence of a confidential informant while in fact deploying this particularly sweeping and invasive surveillance tool." The author suggests - between the lines anyway - that the authorities claim there's a CI, when really that CI is a Stingray. To apply that logic to this case, the CI "X" seems to be a convenient way to get around pesky constitutional protections and not have to mention the use of a Stingray.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#15
post #5

If three armed gang members are on the run after shooting someone, and an informant names some suspects, looking up the location of the suspects' phones seems acceptable to me. I have no doubt that stingrays are abused, but this specific instance, even if not legal, is ethical. That said, I do have issues with the OPD's incompetence and the prosecution's attempt at a cover-up. Seriously, why did the officer put himse…

Tl;dr: The least ethical time to ignore the law is when a highly dynamic incident is underway. > If three armed gang members are on the run after shooting someone, and an informant names some suspects, looking up the location of the suspects' phones seems acceptable to me. I have no doubt that stingrays are abused, but this specific instance, even if not legal, is ethical. This assumes that 1. The informant is truthf…

I'm aware of the inaccuracy of eyewitness testimony, but that's not relevant in this case. The tip came from a known confidential informant, not a random person. The police were going to pursue the lead, stinger or no. The stinger just made it easier for them to verify that the suspects were at their homes.

Yes, proper procedures are important. Yes, I doubt this stinger usage was legal. Yes, this was bad police work. I agree with all of those points. As I said before, the OPD was incompetent.

Now for a thought experiment: Imagine we lived in a world where police needed a warrant to dust for latent fingerprints. Such procedures would safeguard the privacy of citizens and prevent many abuses of power. Still, I think that world would be worse than this one. Such hindrances would, at the margin, make it harder to solve cases and allow more criminals to evade capture. Those costs are high enough to outweigh the privacy benefits.

Now imagine trying to convince people of the advantages of warrantless fingerprint-dusting. No matter how you frame it, everyone thinks you don't care about civil liberties. Many of them try to educate you on the importance of checks and balances in the legal system. Sounds pretty frustrating, huh?

I hope that helps you see where I'm coming from.

Edit: So far in this whole thread, not a single reply has engaged with my actual argument. (sigh) I give up. Here's another thought experiment: If the Supreme Court ruled in favor of warrantless stingrays, would you be OK with them? If not, maybe legality isn't your true reason for opposing them.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evi…

Let unconstitutionally acquired exidence stand? No, let's not let the abuses of a government stand, as we should also go after its agents.

But this is in fact what we do http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1585

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evi…

Let unconstitutionally acquired exidence stand? No, let's not let the abuses of a government stand, as we should also go after its agents.

The constitutionality of actions used to obtain evidence is completely independent of the truth of the defendants guilt or innocence. If the actions are bad, actually prosecute the actions in non-kangaroo proceedings.

A) let the abuses of a government stand

B) go after its agents

In the US we have neither A nor B.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#18
post #4

This is the first time I've heard of a pen register, apparently somewhat broad, modern parlance for things that capture phone data. It seems pretty damning that they spent the time to fax MetroPCS but couldn't, ya know, even get the pen register or ask a judge to ask if they thought it was a good idea. Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are s…

For an excellent review of the nature of policing and wiretaps in particular, watch the TV show The Wire. On HBO now and Amazon Prime. (and I think the best TV show ever made.)

It's fictionalized but written by an ex-cop and covers the drug trade in Baltimore.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evi…

Let unconstitutionally acquired exidence stand? No, let's not let the abuses of a government stand, as we should also go after its agents.

"We" don't get to go after its agents, only Prosecutors, and investigatory agencies (like the police) get to "go after" them. And if you look at the history of crimes committed by government employees you see that in almost all cases they are never prosecuted.

This is the fundamental problem with government justice-- it will never hold its own people accountable.

The few examples of this happening pale in comparison to the rampant corruption and crime going on, everything from fraudulent warrants to destroying evidence to violating peoples rights and malicious prosecution.

Look at Aaron Swartz for example.

The problem is that people are gullible enough that they think that "the law is the law" when in practice it is people that make the law more than just paper.

And the incentives for the government judiciary are to cut corners, violate rights and protect their own.

Re: An Oakland shooting reveals how cops snoop on cell phones

#20
post #4

This is the first time I've heard of a pen register, apparently somewhat broad, modern parlance for things that capture phone data. It seems pretty damning that they spent the time to fax MetroPCS but couldn't, ya know, even get the pen register or ask a judge to ask if they thought it was a good idea. Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are s…

> Maybe the bad guys are really bad, but sometimes I hope that they get off just to make the point that the cops are suppose to do the "right thing", otherwise the cops really are the bad guys The US way is to exclude evidence and protect the cops--the idea being that cops have no motive to cross lines if they can't use the evidence. More and more I'm leaning towards what I understand is the European way: let the evi…

Why let the evidence stand? Shouldn't it be preferable to exclude the illegally-obtained evidence and punish the police for obtaining it illegally?
Post reply on HN