Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 230 posts

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#121

Post by yibg »

apparent wrote: post #56
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can I ask why? Simply put, Americans gave Republicans a popular mandate to reduce illegal immigration. Much of this was economic: illegal immigrants dilute the labour force. Some, particularly among Latin Americans, rose from perceived injustice: it’s frustrating to go through the American immigration process only to see someone who skipped it live a similar life. Some, e.g. those focused on crime, were just racist…

[flagged]

What's the cause and what's the effect? Less protests because ICE under Obama wasn't taking such a heavy handed and legally gray approach perhaps?

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#122

Post by JumpCrisscross »

stackskipton wrote: post #116
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd imagine the California arrest restriction at it's courts is not constitutional as it conflicts with enforcement of existing federal immigration laws Preëmption is about conflicts of laws [1]. You’d need statute giving ICE the power to enforce its will in state courthouses to preëmpt California law. > Even if it's for cheap labor, Democrats I live in a red state. We started to see ICE enforcement and then our Se…

>You’d need statute giving ICE the power to enforce its will in state courthouses to preempt California law. Legally, it's up for debate on how much power localities can regulate Federal Law Enforcement operations. Federal Government takes the view that it's restrictions on operations by states is almost zero. There is 9th Circuit Ruling that says states can if "a federal officer [must do] no more than is necessary a…

> There is 9th Circuit Ruling that says states can if "a federal officer [must do] no more than is necessary and proper in the performance of his duty" but that's pretty untested ruling

What? States have been fighting over this since the 19th century [1].

> States are loath to attempt to regulate Federal Law Enforcement by running it up the courts since their worry is it hits SCOTUS and they come back with "States have no power, LOLZ"

Source for states being "loath to attempt to regulate federal law enforcment"?

We literally have multiple states--led by California--passing laws which "attempt to regulate" just that. (Exhibit A: the comment you responded to.)

[1] https://statedemocracy.law.wisc.edu/featured/2025/explainer-...

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#123

Post by mothballed »

selectodude wrote: post #77
coredog64 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumption of innocence applies to your trial, not to being apprehended. E.g. the state has to prove that you are guilty. If I'm a US citizen and I get swept up in an immigration raid, my lawyer calls my wife who brings my US passport and I'm released. A pain in the ass, but not a violation of my civil rights. Now if I get beat up by ICE, or they file a false claim for resisting, then sure, we've got grounds for a c…

You cannot be arrested without probable cause. Being arrested in a dragnet immigration raid is just a crystal clear fourth amendment violation. Simple as that.

I was 'not' arrested by DHS/CBP.

They simply got a warrant retroactively after they already did it. Released without charge, but they just invented some paperwork afterwards that an anonymous dog had alerted (judge signed it about 12 hours after I was 'not' arrested). No mention on the PC paperwork who the dog was or who the handler was, as far as I know they didn't exist.

So yeah that's nice in theory but in practice they can simply jail you without recording an arrest, then retroactively invent PC. When I ran a federal background check it came up with no arrests, despite the fact I was imprisoned.

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#124

Post by JumpCrisscross »

cortesoft wrote: post #83
fzeroracer wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By definition, the law is what we, collectively, agree on as being the law. The Supreme Court is only able to serve as the executor of the law on the basis of the institution being seen as legitimate and by virtue of being given that right by society. The Supreme Court suddenly deciding that the constitution does not matter does not make their decision law, it erodes trust in that institution and removes their mandat…

Well, the law of this land is based on the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court ultimate authority to interpret the law. That is what gives it the force of law. Now, the legitimacy of the CONSTITUTION is based on what we, collectively, agree on, however

> the law of this land is based on the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court ultimate authority to interpret the law

The Constitution vests "the judicial Power of the United States" in "one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish" [1].

That isn't the same as "ultimate authority to interpret the law." In practice, SCOTUS does usually have this power, due to Marbury and other precedent. In practice, too, it can be bullied, e.g. by FDR and potentially right now.

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-3/

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#125

Post by warkdarrior »

selectodude wrote: post #77
coredog64 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumption of innocence applies to your trial, not to being apprehended. E.g. the state has to prove that you are guilty. If I'm a US citizen and I get swept up in an immigration raid, my lawyer calls my wife who brings my US passport and I'm released. A pain in the ass, but not a violation of my civil rights. Now if I get beat up by ICE, or they file a false claim for resisting, then sure, we've got grounds for a c…

You cannot be arrested without probable cause. Being arrested in a dragnet immigration raid is just a crystal clear fourth amendment violation. Simple as that.

The Supreme Court was clear that if your skin is not white, this is probable cause. Also location is important (like being at a car wash) or speaking with an accent.

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#126

Post by mothballed »

jedimastert wrote: post #84
gruez wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They're rounding up, detaining and arresting US citizens and destroying their property under the guise of sweeping illegal immigrants. What's the proportion of US citizens arrested compared to actual illegal immigrants?

More than zero.

The number US citizens actually deported is greater than zero, although I'm not sure how many under Trump.

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#127

Post by stackskipton »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #122
stackskipton wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You’d need statute giving ICE the power to enforce its will in state courthouses to preempt California law. Legally, it's up for debate on how much power localities can regulate Federal Law Enforcement operations. Federal Government takes the view that it's restrictions on operations by states is almost zero. There is 9th Circuit Ruling that says states can if "a federal officer [must do] no more than is necessary a…

> There is 9th Circuit Ruling that says states can if "a federal officer [must do] no more than is necessary and proper in the performance of his duty" but that's pretty untested ruling What? States have been fighting over this since the 19th century [1]. > States are loath to attempt to regulate Federal Law Enforcement by running it up the courts since their worry is it hits SCOTUS and they come back with "States ha…

Sure, States have been fighting over this since US Government was formed, however, I'm some ruling from 1812 does not matter.

If you look at recent legal history, Federal Government has won in every case where Federal Law Enforcement was acting as Federal Law Enforcement Officers.

My point is California has passed laws attempting to regulate but as of yet, has not attempted to enforce their laws at all. So are they really attempting or just doing performance art with laws?

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#128

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

godelski wrote: post #106

If you're running an Android phone open settings > Network & Internet > Internet > click on your network (e.g. Google Fi) > turn on 2G network protection (at the bottom). Alternatively: Security & privacy > Advanced Protection > Device protection. That does other stuff too though I'm not aware of a way to do this on iPhones... I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that many of these attacks work by performing 2G…

> a way to do this on iPhones

A quick search suggests Lockdown mode might do it, which is corroborated by their support docs. It also does a bunch of other things that will probably degrade most users' experience, for what it's worth. https://support.apple.com/en-us/105120

> Wireless connectivity: Your device won't automatically join non-secure Wi-Fi networks and will disconnect from a non-secure Wi-Fi network when you turn on Lockdown Mode. 2G and 3G cellular support is turned off for iPhone and iPad.

(Instructions to enable it are on the linked page.)

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#129

Post by hypeatei »

godelski wrote: post #106

If you're running an Android phone open settings > Network & Internet > Internet > click on your network (e.g. Google Fi) > turn on 2G network protection (at the bottom). Alternatively: Security & privacy > Advanced Protection > Device protection. That does other stuff too though I'm not aware of a way to do this on iPhones... I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that many of these attacks work by performing 2G…

Is there a reason why Google and Apple wouldn't turn 2G downgrade off by default? Even the setting itself says "emergency calls over 2G are still allowed" so what is the reasoning behind leaving people exposed to this?

Re: ICE bought vehicles equipped with fake cell towers to spy on phones

#130

Post by seadan83 »

coredog64 wrote: post #60
code_runner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean we created an environment where people could come and find success and live their lives, and we perhaps weren’t as strict as we could’ve been in some situations… I don’t think that violently kidnapping people off the streets, without showing badges, in unmarked vehicles, masked, etc is a punishment that fits the crime. Missing a court date once multiple years ago, failing to navigate a complex process, an…

"due process" means "This is the process the government must follow" and is not shorthand for "You are allowed to appeal to the USSC". I think most people would be surprised how little process is owed to someone who is not legally present in the United States and how few opportunities there are for appeal.

The 14th amendment: "prohibits states from denying any person "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law""

The US constitution applies to all persons (people) inside of the USA regardless of citizenship. The amendment says PERSON, not CITIZEN.

Therefore it should not matter at all how that person got here, they are due the same rights and process as __anyone__ else on American soil. That is the 14th amendment of the constitution, further backed by multiple ultra-important and historical supreme court precedents that rights apply to ALL 'people' and not just 'citizens'.

Post reply on HN