Civilian surveillance is alive and well, because of regional terrorism investigations mandated by the Patriot Act. According to L.A. Weekly, the most recent risk to an individual's privacy and liberty is a real-time mobile phone spy machine called StingRay. While intended for intercepting terrorist transmissions, reports suggest that the LA Police Department used StingRay 21 times in a four-month period of 2012 for routine inspections, where non-suspects' private devices were exposed, unbeknownst to the court system. Call it collateral damage, as the non-suspects lived near individuals the LAPD thought were terrorists. Better yet, call it collateral erosion of the individual privileges of complacent citizens.
Listening in on calls
The LAPD has been getting some heat recently for inappropriate use of StingRay cellular phone technology. The technology was only supposed to be used in terrorism cases, but it turns out that is not all the LAPD was doing. In fact, of the 155 StingRay cases from last year between June and Sept, 13 percent exposed innocent non-suspects. The LAPD officials have not commented on the technology and whether or not it was used illegally, but it was specifically given to them in 2006 with subsidies from the federal Department of Homeland Security to be able to track terrorism. It has been found that the technology is used in many burglary, murder and narcotic cases as well.
The LAPD manuals do not make it clear if this kind of StingRay use is allowed legally without an order from a judge, according to First Amendment Coalition executive director Peter Scheer. He also notes that he does not think it should be allowed. Those who use the technology say it is impossible to avoid every person else when in proximity to a suspect, so people should not be offended.
Regulators getting around regulations
Another troubling aspect of StingRay to civil rights advocates is that the technology can circumvent the standard process of requesting location data from carrier networks before eavesdropping. Typically, regulators have needed a court order before gaining access, but with StingRay, authorities can get around carrier monitors totally in secret.
How come privacy is not important?
There are too many potential privacy violations, according to ACLU lawyer Linda Lye. Others agree with her too. It is unclear how StingRay technology plays a part in privacy laws, but it does need to be addressed.
Listening in on calls
The LAPD has been getting some heat recently for inappropriate use of StingRay cellular phone technology. The technology was only supposed to be used in terrorism cases, but it turns out that is not all the LAPD was doing. In fact, of the 155 StingRay cases from last year between June and Sept, 13 percent exposed innocent non-suspects. The LAPD officials have not commented on the technology and whether or not it was used illegally, but it was specifically given to them in 2006 with subsidies from the federal Department of Homeland Security to be able to track terrorism. It has been found that the technology is used in many burglary, murder and narcotic cases as well.
The LAPD manuals do not make it clear if this kind of StingRay use is allowed legally without an order from a judge, according to First Amendment Coalition executive director Peter Scheer. He also notes that he does not think it should be allowed. Those who use the technology say it is impossible to avoid every person else when in proximity to a suspect, so people should not be offended.
Regulators getting around regulations
Another troubling aspect of StingRay to civil rights advocates is that the technology can circumvent the standard process of requesting location data from carrier networks before eavesdropping. Typically, regulators have needed a court order before gaining access, but with StingRay, authorities can get around carrier monitors totally in secret.
How come privacy is not important?
There are too many potential privacy violations, according to ACLU lawyer Linda Lye. Others agree with her too. It is unclear how StingRay technology plays a part in privacy laws, but it does need to be addressed.
About the Author:
0 comments:
Post a Comment