14 ms·

ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

730 points by mindgam3 7y ago

RandomGuyDTB 7y ago
Stingrays have been known to be used by law enforcement for a decade now. It's about bloody time more information than just "they are used" is opened to the public.
- 8bitsrule 7y ago
  Seems they were in use for about 15 years -before- cellphones became a thing. (See '2009 Utah case' here: https://www.wired.com/2014/03/stingray/ https://www.wired.com/2014/03/stingray/ )
caconym_ 7y ago
Presumably Homeland Security and its child agencies are targeting everybody within 100 miles of a border (~65% of the population) with any and every form of surveillance they can think of, because why not? It's very legal, and very cool.
- 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
  Well they’re targeting incoming presidents of the USA for any reason so why not everyone else as well?
  - Brain_Thief 7y ago
    "For any reason" is exactly the opposite of why the Trump campaign drew the scrutiny of intelligence agencies.
- r00fus 7y ago
  > It's very legal, and very cool. With who? I'd really like to know who is copacetic with this kind of surveillance state.
  - the_snooze 7y ago
    https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/very-legal-and-very-cool https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/very-legal-and-very-cool
  - whatshisface 7y ago
    Cool as in "tacticool," like driving military surplus IED-hardened vehicles around for small town policing.
    - opportune 7y ago
      Or staging a shootout over property theft in an area full of civilians
      - caconym_ 7y ago
        or taking a guy to the hospital in chains so that doctors can spend the night inspecting the inside of his rectum and colon with increasingly invasive procedures because you think he might be hiding drugs in there
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
  - caconym_ 7y ago
    Per the context at the knowyourmeme link, by "very legal and very cool" I essentially mean "we've decided it's legal and now we're doing it and you might think we're full of shit but what are you going to do about it, little people?"
  - hnick 7y ago
    It's a Trump quote.
- 0x0aff374668 7y ago
  Wasn't there just a court case that ruled CBP couldn't force you to unlock your device without a warrant? Like just 2-3 weeks ago.
kick 7y ago
Is it just me, or has the ACLU been on a roll lately? I'm really enjoying its current direction. It might have just been that the most controversial headlines were getting the most airtime, but it seemed to be going off the tracks for a while.
- dsprt4cultr 7y ago
  They're "on a roll" lately because there's been egregious overstepping of government against free speech.
- sachdevap 7y ago
  When was the ACLU going off the tracks exactly?
  - kick 7y ago
    After giving up on Gilmore v. Gonzales, in my opinion.
    - tonyarkles 7y ago
      I just did a quick read here. What options are there for their case? They tried to escalate to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court was not interested. Where do you go from there? (note: Am Canadian, curious about it hypothetically)
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        You're correct; that case has no options remaining. The ACLU would likely have to get a different district to issue a conflicting opinion in a different case to get SCOTUS to take a look.
  - blotter_paper 7y ago
    I love the work that the ACLU does, but they've always been picking and choosing which rights to actively support. See the opinion of the 2nd amendment on their own website: https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment I personally don't hold the constitution as a sacred document, though I do find that it aligns with my ideals more than the actual policies of modern America. I could respect an organization being opposed to an amendment and deciding not to defend it for that reason, but it's always been weird to me that they have to hide behind a legal rationale rather than just admitting their political opposition to individual gun rights. I still love the ACLU, and in the past I've given them time (passing out flyers, IANAL) and money despite these reservations. I'm really not trying to hate on them, but I would consider them "off the tracks" in this regard.
Gusen 7y ago
Schiff,Nadler,Mueller each raped and killed boys in Buffalo on the night of 14Jan2019, as Trump did earlier that morning. 'Impeachment' is a vehicle for keeping power, they are all working together, Pelosi too. Full audio proving this entirely here, all three admit collusion with the President \\On14th of January 2019 at about 11:23pm: Jerrold Nadler steps up to take his turn during the Illuminati "rape party". Nadler rapes and kills three boys in under a minute, however, there was a problem. One of the boys was already dead, so he requests a new one. Jerrold Nadler then requests another ten boys. Donald Reeves: "That's a million dollar request". Nadler responds: " ...you guys will cover it. I'm gonna keep Trump in power" (Trump raped & killed a dozen boys 6:30-7:00 am that morning (Jan14). By the time Nadler is finished, he had raped and killed 24 boys. Audio pulled from the video linked below: 14JanCh4_2300-0000.mp3 - Nadler starts at about twenty minutes in. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kuvv2Zmbw5Jw7onbRI2hCZ0M8FU66GuU/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kuvv2Zmbw5Jw7onbRI2hCZ0M8FU... 14JanCh2_2304-2359.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nofp5xF-aXXcCSgQVwj30KlzE9WLr1x1/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nofp5xF-aXXcCSgQVwj30KlzE9W... 14JanCh3_2302-2359.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wdDIsxfsX7xTBIBZYzV4iE4xEdgmwy5l/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wdDIsxfsX7xTBIBZYzV4iE4xEdg... Further disclosure by Porter about 24:47 in: Oblivious tenant Brian Schlenker comments on something unrelated to the ongoing events: "..call the fucking police...", to which is responded with: "...that's funny because we own the police (Buffalo Police Department), we pay them $6 million dollars a month." 19 minutes in Fred Norris, formerly of the Howard Stern show, is acknowledged on the system. At 19:47 in Porter admits that Brian Schlenker will be the owner of this footage should it be discovered. After Nadler, Ralph Nader is next in line. January 15, 2019 00:20: Special Counsel Robert Mueller takes his turn at the Illuminati "rape party" in Buffalo, New York. Mueller ra[es and kills twelve boys. About roughly 00:55 Representative Adam Schiff who will also be leading an impeachment effort, also requests the same deal as Nadler, and then tries to make a case for getting more than Nadler and Mueller. Adam Schiff rapes and kills three boys. Mueller and Schiff all receive $3 billion dollars each for joing the group. Nadler came back to witness these two rape to make sure they were all bound together under one purpose: keep Trump in power, and also to confirm the payments to each, including his $10.5 billion dollar payment. Between the Mueller and Schiff turns, the group issues orders for ten women to begin prepping more boys for rape. They are former friends and family of Brian Schlenker, and also some long standing Illuminati members who include Elsa Hosk, Gigi & Bella Hadid. Again, the "prep" these females engage means they perform oral sex on the boys’ penis and anus, as a child rapist like Henry Porter would, while trying to remove fecal matter from the boy prior to handing them over to be raped and subsequently murdered. Just a head's up, my voice is scattered throughout all of the footage within the links posted for this update, and is quite loud relative to the desired content at times. Audio links below: 15JanCh4_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZEDJR6jb6ARpcNnWJTokBUKb2J2OQnwZ/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZEDJR6jb6ARpcNnWJTokBUKb2J2... 15JanCh4_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/173aYWvWHH4VGht1h_2nM0IMdw746LeCL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/173aYWvWHH4VGht1h_2nM0IMdw74... 15JanCh2_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EsmHfguwBuo2PbavJ1WYyhiML62tgCkj/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EsmHfguwBuo2PbavJ1WYyhiML62... 15JanCh2_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZnWRnBryalNQu2yJmfJUdS2pA_rGSFH/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZnWRnBryalNQu2yJmfJUdS2pA_... 15JanCh3_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zsEwYC875wQu6btsSbNznHsJinxYHxUL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zsEwYC875wQu6btsSbNznHsJinx... 15JanCh3_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/15UAY2er2LdTViXG4azy_bc_oQUzvLpFh/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/15UAY2er2LdTViXG4azy_bc_oQUz... //Full 134 page PDF [update10.Dec.2019]: FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJ... //This post will be censored when this account logs off, the posts are "shadow banned". They try to make it look like the post is live, but it is not. Here is an example. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zxS8JESoIg7uxRkUgdptMsF6SuJedYKz/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zxS8JESoIg7uxRkUgdptMsF6SuJ... \\Previously: President of the United States Donald Trump rapes and kills 15 boys in Buffalo, NY on January 10, 2019. This is audio of the event from 10 Jan 2019. Download the mp3 and put on headphones, and turn the volume all the way up. 10JanCh3_1255-1557.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/18lTt_YKFEtsV6YDNzXFVQYLkStY-kSg2/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/18lTt_YKFEtsV6YDNzXFVQYLkStY... This is audio of the President, Donald J. Trump, demanding a four billion dollar bribe from child rapists to “take a blind eye” on January 3, 2019. Trump becomes one on January 14th, 2019. Also, here is the big reason the major networks do not report any of it. //Download the video, turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Note: there is not much to see in the video, the audio is picked up from another [illegal surveillance] system. Trump is on a call from with Henry Porter and Gigi Hadid. See page 63 in the PDF. Bribe demand at 10:18am: 3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77... //President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, rapes and kills his first boy at 6:32am. Video link below: 14JanCh3_600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/154QvA5hwyHGYIVXtod1ZbsOHFUJNbqZW/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/154QvA5hwyHGYIVXtod1ZbsOHFUJ... 14JanCh2_600-700.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UkqmnMwZiWy7xxWngltqwoKLTJL-IZ_/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UkqmnMwZiWy7xxWngltqwoKLTJ... //On January 18, 2019 at 8:31am (see page 8) Trump acknowledges the four billion dollar bribe and says: "Let's get it done and get to fucking some kids." Video link below: 18JanCh3_725-.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bVTcGq5Z9oOSAiOQcKYrmuK4TwoNmY1h/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bVTcGq5Z9oOSAiOQcKYrmuK4Two... //A big reason this has not been reported by the major news networks is right here. Lester Holt of NBC Nightly News, apparently a member of the Illuminati since the 980's, along with ABC Nightly News lead anchor David Muir, stop over to the Porter studio in Buffalo on January 14th, 2019 at 5:00am. They both rape and kill about two dozen boys by 6:01 am. Muir starts around 5:14 am, then Holt about 5:38 am. Multi-billionaire Rupert Murdoch, owner of News Corp & Fox Corporation, takes his turn after Holt. Video links below: 14JanCh3_500- 601.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7NKepeyG_FfdQRrM7KsnFOZOOX3o7UL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7NKepeyG_FfdQRrM7KsnFOZOOX... 14JanCh2_530- 600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZzgN5ilI7ToroU5cfqMaL4o2u1RwidV/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZzgN5ilI7ToroU5cfqMaL4o2u1... Adding to the reason this is not picked up by the media, CBS and Viacom owner Sumner Redstone + Leslie Moonves rape boys following the President. 14JanCh3_700.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/10XDw6x3ldnnQiq7oIjpdYVENyXaB4aI0/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/10XDw6x3ldnnQiq7oIjpdYVENyXa... 14JanCh2_700-800.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NS_e6AzEZ05wnfljkGMETGU5CWYKfRDp/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NS_e6AzEZ05wnfljkGMETGU5CWY... //This is the tip of the iseberg. //134 page PDF [updated 10.Dec.2019]: FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJ...
syshum 7y ago
Hopefully, this puts to rest the idea that government can use "private contracts" as a end-run around constitutional and legal restrictions on their activity They have been hiding behind the NDA as a reason they should not have to follow federal disclosure laws, but never in the history of the law has a private contract superceeded the law itself. they also hide behind these same NDA's when criminal defendants get to court and want to challenge the use of the tech on 4th amendment grounds Hopefully the ACLU can put a end to that, the government should not be able to contract with any organization that prevents them from disclosing their activity to the public. Seems law enfrocement has lost sight of who they awnser to, which should be the people of this nation
- calibas 7y ago
  cough Five eyes cough
- arminiusreturns 7y ago
  The third party doctrine loophole is huge and not likely to be impacted very much by this, unfortunately. Here's a relevant talk from the National Constitution Center, if you want to hear some of the nuance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW32k7x7zE0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW32k7x7zE0
  - syshum 7y ago
    Third party doctrine has little to with this case, I agree it is a problem, but that is not what I was talking about in my post The Thrid Pary doctrine allows the Government to end run the 4th amendment if you discloused info to a 3rd party. In this instance, the government is claiming they do not have to talk about the technology at all, even to the point of proving it actually does what they claim. In criminal Trails they treat it as a black box that is magical.. this should not be allowed evidence collected by it directly or as a result of his use should be barred unless the defence has access to the technology fo independent review The government claims they do not have to disclose anything because they signed a contract with the manufacturer saying they would not disclose anything about the tech.
calibas 7y ago
Stingray use requires a warrant and every case should be dismissed where one was used without a warrant. I'm sure that's the main reason they want to hide the use of stingrays, they know they're doing something wrong. Police having the ability to spy on everyone with little to no oversight is nightmarish authoritarianism, it's completely against the spirit of American democracy, not to mention in violation of The Constitution.
- fooey 7y ago
  The problem is knowing a Stingray was ever used in the first place. It's been documented that the police routinely utilize parallel construction when they discover things through illegal means in the first place. https://www.wired.com/story/stingray-secret-surveillance-programs/ https://www.wired.com/story/stingray-secret-surveillance-pro...
  - calibas 7y ago
    Seems like the police casually breaking the law is the core of the issue. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
    - TallGuyShort 7y ago
      The ACLU. edit: to be clear, I think the government itself could really do with reeling it back a bit as well - but this very news is a reminder that some people are watching out for the watched.
      - masonic 7y ago
        The ACLU was mostly mute on these issues during the prior administration, when these abuses became routine.
        gnud 7y ago
        Just a couple of links to disprove this troll: https://www.aclu.org/cases/florida-stingray-foia https://www.aclu.org/cases/florida-stingray-foia (2014) https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-florida-v-city-sarasota-stingray-cell-phone-tracking https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-florida-v-city-sarasota-stin... (2014) https://www.aclu.org/cases/foia-request-justice-department-policy-memos-gps-location-tracking https://www.aclu.org/cases/foia-request-justice-department-p... (2014) ... and tons more, at https://www.aclu.org/defending-our-rights/court-battles?topics=98 https://www.aclu.org/defending-our-rights/court-battles?topi...
abeppu 7y ago
Some informed person can probably tell us: are there any technical developments on the horizon which could plausibly make stingrays unviable? From a lay perspective, it seems like cell tech hasn't been designed to meet some criteria that ought to be achievable. - Are there future cell technology standards being planned which would make it harder for a 3rd party device to impersonate a cell tower? (e.g. the police would actively need the cell network to help them sign something) - Why can't we encrypt calls and texts in a way which doesn't let all this stuff get read? Like (handwaving) either trust the network and encrypt with a key they provide, or else some form end-to-end encryption (where maybe generating keys is part of what happens when you activate a sim card or something)? Like, sure the lawsuits are important, but why did we end up with a system where these tools are possible?
- guelo 7y ago
  Since the FCC sanctions stingray use for law enforcement I'm sure they make sure that any new mobile radio technology is compliant with police spying requirements.
  - upofadown 7y ago
    Last I heard these things were FCC licensed for "emergency use only". The issue is that the FCC can't override federal law and deliberate interference with radio communications is illegal under such law.
- tbihl 7y ago
  5G is by nature shorter range, which at least makes the surveillance harder to do and more targeted when it happens. But I can't say much for the protocol, having not done much with it.
  - xucheng 7y ago
    On the flip side, I think this would make pinpoint the device‘s geo-location much easier.
chishaku 7y ago
Contribute to the ACLU here: https://action.aclu.org/give/now https://action.aclu.org/give/now
- jammygit 7y ago
  Canadian equivalent: https://ccla.org/give https://ccla.org/give
- AndresToro 7y ago
  100% agree, I've contributed for a couple of years now and headlines like this just brighten up my day knowing I've helped.
- greyhair 7y ago
  Have been a contributor for years. They fight the good fight.
ga-vu 7y ago
Source: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/ice-and-cbp-are-secretly-tracking-us-using-stingrays-were-suing/ https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/ice-and-cbp-are... For more insight and details.
tylerjwilk00 7y ago
This made me wonder, Do spoofed callers appear on a capture device as the spoofed number? If so, you could in theory use law to target anyone by calling their number using a spoofed number that is included on a surveillance order. Just keep calling the numbers you want to monitor and the net keeps getting bigger. Please tell me this is not the case?
- _jal 7y ago
  Caller ID information is sent to the receiver by the switch. If your switch is under your control (say, you're using Asterisk), you can send whatever you want, as demonstrated nearly constantly by all those spam calls.
jokoon 7y ago
Knowing Bellard managed to build a 3G cell tower just by using a cheap antenna, I guess it means anybody can build a stingray, although connecting to the cellphone network might not be a trivial thing to do. No idea how companies secure their networks, and I wonder if there are security standard about it.
- ColanR 7y ago
  Where might I find more information about this?
  - jokoon 7y ago
    https://bellard.org/lte/ https://bellard.org/lte/ Actually it's a 4G antenna. It's not a stingray, but to me, it's a big step towards it if you're a black hat and can find a way to access the cellphone network. I have optimism and want to believe most big telco have good security practices and make it extremely difficult or impossible to connect to their network. Although one might be able to do some social engineering and do it, since the cellphone network requires a lot of antenna and manpower to install and maintain them. For example, imagine you set up a fake company that installs those antennas. How can the telco make sure the antenna is not being moved around (monitoring GPS of the connected smartphones, maybe checking the residency of users to see if something is statistically fishy)? So in short, I tend to think it's not very hard to penetrate cellphone networks, unless the telco spends enough money to secure it and triple check their contractors.
williesleg 7y ago
Can we send them all to China? They need the ACLU fix there.
mLuby 7y ago
If we had a crowd-sourced database of cell towers (picture & coordinates) wouldn't it then be straightforward to know (and report) when your phone wasn't connecting to a legitimate tower? I for one want to make sure the criminals aren't intercepting my signal with home-made stingrays; the police have other lawful ways to get what they need.
- sb057 7y ago
  People are way ahead of you: https://cellularprivacy.github.io/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detector/ https://cellularprivacy.github.io/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detec...
  - mindgam3 7y ago
    Not sure if those apps works as well as advertised. https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid-basically-useless-research/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid... Edit: fully removing amp from link
    - rahuldottech 7y ago
      Non-AMP link: https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid-basically-useless-research/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid...
      - mindgam3 7y ago
        Fixed, thanks.
  - btcbanking 7y ago
    The f-droid link on that page brings a 404
- nerdponx 7y ago
  Considering all the stuff that's open public information, it's a bit surprising that cell tower locations aren't.
no_opinions 7y ago
Why not focus policies around using the surveillance tools? The tools should be as powerful as possible. To keep people safe, shouldn't infrastructure be powerful enough to tap anything instantly with proper authorization, even backward in time? Why not? Then we're focused on making rules better. Isn't that the best thing to do in a system of laws and standards? Imagine if you could change any aspect of the system to make it more proportional, fair, ethical, whatever. Why not think about asking the right questions, weighing the pros and cons, and tailoring a way to improve it with minimum side effects? Also, sometimes the regulations are so strict, it's dangerous. For instance, here's an example where the rules around stingrays being so strict led a guy to get away with murder (in eyes of the judge): > Circuit Judge Yolanda Tanner said in court Monday that while she is suppressing the evidence “with great reluctance,” Copes is “likely guilty.” https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/citing-unconstitutional-search-via-stingray-judge-suppresses-murder-evidence/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/citing-unconstit... I wonder what it would have been like had that case been in Florida. Which has sweet inevitable evidence law.
- abvdasker 7y ago
  > The tools should be as powerful as possible. I think a lot of people would disagree with this premise. The argument against it is basically that abuse of powerful surveillance technologies is inevitable precisely because the technology is so powerful. In reality, law enforcement is only incentivized to catch criminals, not necessarily to protect people's privacy or personal freedoms, so LE will abuse these capabilities 100% of the time they have access to them. A more subtle argument is that bureaucratic oversight of LE is almost always impotent to reign them in and has every reason not to due so due to a lack of accountability. A "fair, ethical" system is fundamentally incompatible with one in which law enforcement has sweeping surveillance capabilities and the lack of oversight which always results from any sufficiently large/slow/complex legal system.
  - no_opinions 7y ago
    > The argument against it is basically that abuse of powerful surveillance technologies is inevitable precisely because the technology is so powerful. What would be some examples of an abuse? What would be some examples of a powerful surveillance technology? For instance, what "surveillance technology" isn't already an internal diagnostic tool for day-to-day system administration for a telecom/service provider? Only difference is who picks the target and them having oversight (likely having to provide a predicate/rationale). Why is this so bad? If there's a lack of oversight, what rules and systems would you suggest to prevent abuse, as you define it?
ljm 7y ago
Watch Mr Robot and see this in action
rolph 7y ago
after reading through the comments i found this on hackaday, its from 2018; seems germaine to the current topics in thread: https://hackaday.com/tag/stingray/ https://hackaday.com/tag/stingray/ the first paragraph is an intro speech of sorts then the real content begins. There is an interesting article linked in that part so i want to bring it to the fore. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/dhs-confirms-presence-cell-site-simulators-us-capitol https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/dhs-confirms-presence-... it seems that a number of factions may have been using "stingray" devices and thier contemporary equivalents for some time.
bodka 7y ago
aSDASDASDASDASD
- bodka 7y ago
  HOW REPLY WORKS
zw123456 7y ago
Generally if the RSRP or RSSI increases significantly that is a dead give away you are on a stingray. You don't really need an app to see that (google how to see it for your phone type). Of course, it is always possible that your carrier just turned up a new site closer to you but that is not something that happens often and you can usually notice it. Some comments about mm-wave 5G, keep in mind that mm-wave != 5G. But on mm-wave stingray becomes more difficult due to the high directionality of short wavelengths. But at lower bands, there is no advantage of 5G over 4G in terms of resilience over stingray types of attacks (which are basically a L1 middleman attack, similar to age old wifi types of spoofs).
- _salmon 7y ago
  Watching signal strengths is all well and good, but you need historical data to compare to. This is a viable option for a few sites (maybe near where you live), but not an option when you're on the go.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
greyhair 7y ago
I have a femtocell in my home, because my small neighborhood sits in a dead zone. Not a repeater, a full femtocell. To the casual security conscious user, that is probably going to look like a 'stingray', since you will be walking down the street with a gradually dropping RSSI, when all at once, boom, you walk into a five bar signal and life is good. It covers about a 300 ft radius with the most blessedly beautiful signal you can imagine. Maxes out at 100Mb/S, since that is all the backhaul it gets from the ISP where it is connected. (Not that I am complaining about 100/100 in the house.) But it isn't a Stingray. It is a fully secure registered femtocell base station. Given that it hasn't moved in five years, it may well be on someone's map of established cell towers.
- thatcat 7y ago
  Can you use this device to enumerate imei of passers-by?
  - greyhair 7y ago
    No. It is a closed secure box with ssl backhaul to the provider. I was involved in the chip architecture for the silicon that is used in the box as well as the software engineer involved in the secure boot path for the cellular modems. It is one large chip with all the modems and application processors in one chunk of silicon. No unencrypted data, air link or Ethernet back haul, ever leaves the die. From that, I am familiar with the physical design that the manufacturer implemented. (We did a lot of support work to get the manufacturer up and running) They even go so far as to have a physical 'self destruct' button within the box. If you try to physically open it, it will never boot again. The service provider states in the documentation (when you get the box) that if you tamper with the device such that the self-defeat gets activated, you have to pay full retail for the now dead box (they provided the femtocell for free if you live in a dead zone). I laughed when I opened the retail box and that was the first thing in the document stack. Basically a large font "you have been warned"

730 points by mindgam3 7y ago

Stingrays have been known to be used by law enforcement for a decade now. It's about bloody time more information than just "they are used" is opened to the public.

8bitsrule 7y ago
Seems they were in use for about 15 years -before- cellphones became a thing. (See '2009 Utah case' here: https://www.wired.com/2014/03/stingray/ https://www.wired.com/2014/03/stingray/ )

caconym_ 7y ago

Presumably Homeland Security and its child agencies are targeting everybody within 100 miles of a border (~65% of the population) with any and every form of surveillance they can think of, because why not? It's very legal, and very cool.

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
Well they’re targeting incoming presidents of the USA for any reason so why not everyone else as well?
- Brain_Thief 7y ago
  "For any reason" is exactly the opposite of why the Trump campaign drew the scrutiny of intelligence agencies.
r00fus 7y ago
> It's very legal, and very cool. With who? I'd really like to know who is copacetic with this kind of surveillance state.
- the_snooze 7y ago
  https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/very-legal-and-very-cool https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/very-legal-and-very-cool
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Cool as in "tacticool," like driving military surplus IED-hardened vehicles around for small town policing.
  - opportune 7y ago
    Or staging a shootout over property theft in an area full of civilians
    - caconym_ 7y ago
      or taking a guy to the hospital in chains so that doctors can spend the night inspecting the inside of his rectum and colon with increasingly invasive procedures because you think he might be hiding drugs in there
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
- caconym_ 7y ago
  Per the context at the knowyourmeme link, by "very legal and very cool" I essentially mean "we've decided it's legal and now we're doing it and you might think we're full of shit but what are you going to do about it, little people?"
- hnick 7y ago
  It's a Trump quote.
0x0aff374668 7y ago
Wasn't there just a court case that ruled CBP couldn't force you to unlock your device without a warrant? Like just 2-3 weeks ago.

kick 7y ago

Is it just me, or has the ACLU been on a roll lately? I'm really enjoying its current direction. It might have just been that the most controversial headlines were getting the most airtime, but it seemed to be going off the tracks for a while.

dsprt4cultr 7y ago
They're "on a roll" lately because there's been egregious overstepping of government against free speech.
sachdevap 7y ago
When was the ACLU going off the tracks exactly?
- kick 7y ago
  After giving up on Gilmore v. Gonzales, in my opinion.
  - tonyarkles 7y ago
    I just did a quick read here. What options are there for their case? They tried to escalate to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court was not interested. Where do you go from there? (note: Am Canadian, curious about it hypothetically)
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      You're correct; that case has no options remaining. The ACLU would likely have to get a different district to issue a conflicting opinion in a different case to get SCOTUS to take a look.
- blotter_paper 7y ago
  I love the work that the ACLU does, but they've always been picking and choosing which rights to actively support. See the opinion of the 2nd amendment on their own website: https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment I personally don't hold the constitution as a sacred document, though I do find that it aligns with my ideals more than the actual policies of modern America. I could respect an organization being opposed to an amendment and deciding not to defend it for that reason, but it's always been weird to me that they have to hide behind a legal rationale rather than just admitting their political opposition to individual gun rights. I still love the ACLU, and in the past I've given them time (passing out flyers, IANAL) and money despite these reservations. I'm really not trying to hate on them, but I would consider them "off the tracks" in this regard.

Gusen 7y ago

Schiff,Nadler,Mueller each raped and killed boys in Buffalo on the night of 14Jan2019, as Trump did earlier that morning. 'Impeachment' is a vehicle for keeping power, they are all working together, Pelosi too. Full audio proving this entirely here, all three admit collusion with the President \\On14th of January 2019 at about 11:23pm: Jerrold Nadler steps up to take his turn during the Illuminati "rape party". Nadler rapes and kills three boys in under a minute, however, there was a problem. One of the boys was already dead, so he requests a new one. Jerrold Nadler then requests another ten boys. Donald Reeves: "That's a million dollar request". Nadler responds: " ...you guys will cover it. I'm gonna keep Trump in power" (Trump raped & killed a dozen boys 6:30-7:00 am that morning (Jan14). By the time Nadler is finished, he had raped and killed 24 boys. Audio pulled from the video linked below: 14JanCh4_2300-0000.mp3 - Nadler starts at about twenty minutes in. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kuvv2Zmbw5Jw7onbRI2hCZ0M8FU66GuU/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kuvv2Zmbw5Jw7onbRI2hCZ0M8FU... 14JanCh2_2304-2359.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nofp5xF-aXXcCSgQVwj30KlzE9WLr1x1/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nofp5xF-aXXcCSgQVwj30KlzE9W... 14JanCh3_2302-2359.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wdDIsxfsX7xTBIBZYzV4iE4xEdgmwy5l/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wdDIsxfsX7xTBIBZYzV4iE4xEdg... Further disclosure by Porter about 24:47 in: Oblivious tenant Brian Schlenker comments on something unrelated to the ongoing events: "..call the fucking police...", to which is responded with: "...that's funny because we own the police (Buffalo Police Department), we pay them $6 million dollars a month." 19 minutes in Fred Norris, formerly of the Howard Stern show, is acknowledged on the system. At 19:47 in Porter admits that Brian Schlenker will be the owner of this footage should it be discovered. After Nadler, Ralph Nader is next in line. January 15, 2019 00:20: Special Counsel Robert Mueller takes his turn at the Illuminati "rape party" in Buffalo, New York. Mueller ra[es and kills twelve boys. About roughly 00:55 Representative Adam Schiff who will also be leading an impeachment effort, also requests the same deal as Nadler, and then tries to make a case for getting more than Nadler and Mueller. Adam Schiff rapes and kills three boys. Mueller and Schiff all receive $3 billion dollars each for joing the group. Nadler came back to witness these two rape to make sure they were all bound together under one purpose: keep Trump in power, and also to confirm the payments to each, including his $10.5 billion dollar payment. Between the Mueller and Schiff turns, the group issues orders for ten women to begin prepping more boys for rape. They are former friends and family of Brian Schlenker, and also some long standing Illuminati members who include Elsa Hosk, Gigi & Bella Hadid. Again, the "prep" these females engage means they perform oral sex on the boys’ penis and anus, as a child rapist like Henry Porter would, while trying to remove fecal matter from the boy prior to handing them over to be raped and subsequently murdered. Just a head's up, my voice is scattered throughout all of the footage within the links posted for this update, and is quite loud relative to the desired content at times. Audio links below: 15JanCh4_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZEDJR6jb6ARpcNnWJTokBUKb2J2OQnwZ/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZEDJR6jb6ARpcNnWJTokBUKb2J2... 15JanCh4_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/173aYWvWHH4VGht1h_2nM0IMdw746LeCL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/173aYWvWHH4VGht1h_2nM0IMdw74... 15JanCh2_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EsmHfguwBuo2PbavJ1WYyhiML62tgCkj/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EsmHfguwBuo2PbavJ1WYyhiML62... 15JanCh2_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZnWRnBryalNQu2yJmfJUdS2pA_rGSFH/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZnWRnBryalNQu2yJmfJUdS2pA_... 15JanCh3_000-100.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zsEwYC875wQu6btsSbNznHsJinxYHxUL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zsEwYC875wQu6btsSbNznHsJinx... 15JanCh3_100-200.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/15UAY2er2LdTViXG4azy_bc_oQUzvLpFh/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/15UAY2er2LdTViXG4azy_bc_oQUz... //Full 134 page PDF [update10.Dec.2019]: FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJ... //This post will be censored when this account logs off, the posts are "shadow banned". They try to make it look like the post is live, but it is not. Here is an example. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zxS8JESoIg7uxRkUgdptMsF6SuJedYKz/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zxS8JESoIg7uxRkUgdptMsF6SuJ... \\Previously: President of the United States Donald Trump rapes and kills 15 boys in Buffalo, NY on January 10, 2019. This is audio of the event from 10 Jan 2019. Download the mp3 and put on headphones, and turn the volume all the way up. 10JanCh3_1255-1557.mp3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/18lTt_YKFEtsV6YDNzXFVQYLkStY-kSg2/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/18lTt_YKFEtsV6YDNzXFVQYLkStY... This is audio of the President, Donald J. Trump, demanding a four billion dollar bribe from child rapists to “take a blind eye” on January 3, 2019. Trump becomes one on January 14th, 2019. Also, here is the big reason the major networks do not report any of it. //Download the video, turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Note: there is not much to see in the video, the audio is picked up from another [illegal surveillance] system. Trump is on a call from with Henry Porter and Gigi Hadid. See page 63 in the PDF. Bribe demand at 10:18am: 3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77... //President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, rapes and kills his first boy at 6:32am. Video link below: 14JanCh3_600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/154QvA5hwyHGYIVXtod1ZbsOHFUJNbqZW/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/154QvA5hwyHGYIVXtod1ZbsOHFUJ... 14JanCh2_600-700.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UkqmnMwZiWy7xxWngltqwoKLTJL-IZ_/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UkqmnMwZiWy7xxWngltqwoKLTJ... //On January 18, 2019 at 8:31am (see page 8) Trump acknowledges the four billion dollar bribe and says: "Let's get it done and get to fucking some kids." Video link below: 18JanCh3_725-.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bVTcGq5Z9oOSAiOQcKYrmuK4TwoNmY1h/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bVTcGq5Z9oOSAiOQcKYrmuK4Two... //A big reason this has not been reported by the major news networks is right here. Lester Holt of NBC Nightly News, apparently a member of the Illuminati since the 980's, along with ABC Nightly News lead anchor David Muir, stop over to the Porter studio in Buffalo on January 14th, 2019 at 5:00am. They both rape and kill about two dozen boys by 6:01 am. Muir starts around 5:14 am, then Holt about 5:38 am. Multi-billionaire Rupert Murdoch, owner of News Corp & Fox Corporation, takes his turn after Holt. Video links below: 14JanCh3_500- 601.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7NKepeyG_FfdQRrM7KsnFOZOOX3o7UL/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7NKepeyG_FfdQRrM7KsnFOZOOX... 14JanCh2_530- 600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZzgN5ilI7ToroU5cfqMaL4o2u1RwidV/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NZzgN5ilI7ToroU5cfqMaL4o2u1... Adding to the reason this is not picked up by the media, CBS and Viacom owner Sumner Redstone + Leslie Moonves rape boys following the President. 14JanCh3_700.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/10XDw6x3ldnnQiq7oIjpdYVENyXaB4aI0/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/10XDw6x3ldnnQiq7oIjpdYVENyXa... 14JanCh2_700-800.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NS_e6AzEZ05wnfljkGMETGU5CWYKfRDp/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NS_e6AzEZ05wnfljkGMETGU5CWY... //This is the tip of the iseberg. //134 page PDF [updated 10.Dec.2019]: FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJ...

syshum 7y ago

Hopefully, this puts to rest the idea that government can use "private contracts" as a end-run around constitutional and legal restrictions on their activity They have been hiding behind the NDA as a reason they should not have to follow federal disclosure laws, but never in the history of the law has a private contract superceeded the law itself. they also hide behind these same NDA's when criminal defendants get to court and want to challenge the use of the tech on 4th amendment grounds Hopefully the ACLU can put a end to that, the government should not be able to contract with any organization that prevents them from disclosing their activity to the public. Seems law enfrocement has lost sight of who they awnser to, which should be the people of this nation

calibas 7y ago
cough Five eyes cough
arminiusreturns 7y ago
The third party doctrine loophole is huge and not likely to be impacted very much by this, unfortunately. Here's a relevant talk from the National Constitution Center, if you want to hear some of the nuance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW32k7x7zE0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW32k7x7zE0
- syshum 7y ago
  Third party doctrine has little to with this case, I agree it is a problem, but that is not what I was talking about in my post The Thrid Pary doctrine allows the Government to end run the 4th amendment if you discloused info to a 3rd party. In this instance, the government is claiming they do not have to talk about the technology at all, even to the point of proving it actually does what they claim. In criminal Trails they treat it as a black box that is magical.. this should not be allowed evidence collected by it directly or as a result of his use should be barred unless the defence has access to the technology fo independent review The government claims they do not have to disclose anything because they signed a contract with the manufacturer saying they would not disclose anything about the tech.

calibas 7y ago

Stingray use requires a warrant and every case should be dismissed where one was used without a warrant. I'm sure that's the main reason they want to hide the use of stingrays, they know they're doing something wrong. Police having the ability to spy on everyone with little to no oversight is nightmarish authoritarianism, it's completely against the spirit of American democracy, not to mention in violation of The Constitution.

fooey 7y ago
The problem is knowing a Stingray was ever used in the first place. It's been documented that the police routinely utilize parallel construction when they discover things through illegal means in the first place. https://www.wired.com/story/stingray-secret-surveillance-programs/ https://www.wired.com/story/stingray-secret-surveillance-pro...
- calibas 7y ago
  Seems like the police casually breaking the law is the core of the issue. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
  - TallGuyShort 7y ago
    The ACLU. edit: to be clear, I think the government itself could really do with reeling it back a bit as well - but this very news is a reminder that some people are watching out for the watched.
    - masonic 7y ago
      The ACLU was mostly mute on these issues during the prior administration, when these abuses became routine.
      - gnud 7y ago
        Just a couple of links to disprove this troll: https://www.aclu.org/cases/florida-stingray-foia https://www.aclu.org/cases/florida-stingray-foia (2014) https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-florida-v-city-sarasota-stingray-cell-phone-tracking https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-florida-v-city-sarasota-stin... (2014) https://www.aclu.org/cases/foia-request-justice-department-policy-memos-gps-location-tracking https://www.aclu.org/cases/foia-request-justice-department-p... (2014) ... and tons more, at https://www.aclu.org/defending-our-rights/court-battles?topics=98 https://www.aclu.org/defending-our-rights/court-battles?topi...

abeppu 7y ago

Some informed person can probably tell us: are there any technical developments on the horizon which could plausibly make stingrays unviable? From a lay perspective, it seems like cell tech hasn't been designed to meet some criteria that ought to be achievable. - Are there future cell technology standards being planned which would make it harder for a 3rd party device to impersonate a cell tower? (e.g. the police would actively need the cell network to help them sign something) - Why can't we encrypt calls and texts in a way which doesn't let all this stuff get read? Like (handwaving) either trust the network and encrypt with a key they provide, or else some form end-to-end encryption (where maybe generating keys is part of what happens when you activate a sim card or something)? Like, sure the lawsuits are important, but why did we end up with a system where these tools are possible?

guelo 7y ago
Since the FCC sanctions stingray use for law enforcement I'm sure they make sure that any new mobile radio technology is compliant with police spying requirements.
- upofadown 7y ago
  Last I heard these things were FCC licensed for "emergency use only". The issue is that the FCC can't override federal law and deliberate interference with radio communications is illegal under such law.
tbihl 7y ago
5G is by nature shorter range, which at least makes the surveillance harder to do and more targeted when it happens. But I can't say much for the protocol, having not done much with it.
- xucheng 7y ago
  On the flip side, I think this would make pinpoint the device‘s geo-location much easier.

chishaku 7y ago

Contribute to the ACLU here: https://action.aclu.org/give/now https://action.aclu.org/give/now

jammygit 7y ago
Canadian equivalent: https://ccla.org/give https://ccla.org/give
AndresToro 7y ago
100% agree, I've contributed for a couple of years now and headlines like this just brighten up my day knowing I've helped.
greyhair 7y ago
Have been a contributor for years. They fight the good fight.

ga-vu 7y ago

Source: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/ice-and-cbp-are-secretly-tracking-us-using-stingrays-were-suing/ https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/ice-and-cbp-are... For more insight and details.

tylerjwilk00 7y ago

This made me wonder, Do spoofed callers appear on a capture device as the spoofed number? If so, you could in theory use law to target anyone by calling their number using a spoofed number that is included on a surveillance order. Just keep calling the numbers you want to monitor and the net keeps getting bigger. Please tell me this is not the case?

_jal 7y ago
Caller ID information is sent to the receiver by the switch. If your switch is under your control (say, you're using Asterisk), you can send whatever you want, as demonstrated nearly constantly by all those spam calls.

jokoon 7y ago

Knowing Bellard managed to build a 3G cell tower just by using a cheap antenna, I guess it means anybody can build a stingray, although connecting to the cellphone network might not be a trivial thing to do. No idea how companies secure their networks, and I wonder if there are security standard about it.

ColanR 7y ago
Where might I find more information about this?
- jokoon 7y ago
  https://bellard.org/lte/ https://bellard.org/lte/ Actually it's a 4G antenna. It's not a stingray, but to me, it's a big step towards it if you're a black hat and can find a way to access the cellphone network. I have optimism and want to believe most big telco have good security practices and make it extremely difficult or impossible to connect to their network. Although one might be able to do some social engineering and do it, since the cellphone network requires a lot of antenna and manpower to install and maintain them. For example, imagine you set up a fake company that installs those antennas. How can the telco make sure the antenna is not being moved around (monitoring GPS of the connected smartphones, maybe checking the residency of users to see if something is statistically fishy)? So in short, I tend to think it's not very hard to penetrate cellphone networks, unless the telco spends enough money to secure it and triple check their contractors.

williesleg 7y ago

Can we send them all to China? They need the ACLU fix there.

mLuby 7y ago

If we had a crowd-sourced database of cell towers (picture & coordinates) wouldn't it then be straightforward to know (and report) when your phone wasn't connecting to a legitimate tower? I for one want to make sure the criminals aren't intercepting my signal with home-made stingrays; the police have other lawful ways to get what they need.

sb057 7y ago
People are way ahead of you: https://cellularprivacy.github.io/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detector/ https://cellularprivacy.github.io/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detec...
- mindgam3 7y ago
  Not sure if those apps works as well as advertised. https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid-basically-useless-research/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid... Edit: fully removing amp from link
  - rahuldottech 7y ago
    Non-AMP link: https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid-basically-useless-research/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/stingray-detector-apps-andorid...
    - mindgam3 7y ago
      Fixed, thanks.
- btcbanking 7y ago
  The f-droid link on that page brings a 404
nerdponx 7y ago
Considering all the stuff that's open public information, it's a bit surprising that cell tower locations aren't.

no_opinions 7y ago

Why not focus policies around using the surveillance tools? The tools should be as powerful as possible. To keep people safe, shouldn't infrastructure be powerful enough to tap anything instantly with proper authorization, even backward in time? Why not? Then we're focused on making rules better. Isn't that the best thing to do in a system of laws and standards? Imagine if you could change any aspect of the system to make it more proportional, fair, ethical, whatever. Why not think about asking the right questions, weighing the pros and cons, and tailoring a way to improve it with minimum side effects? Also, sometimes the regulations are so strict, it's dangerous. For instance, here's an example where the rules around stingrays being so strict led a guy to get away with murder (in eyes of the judge): > Circuit Judge Yolanda Tanner said in court Monday that while she is suppressing the evidence “with great reluctance,” Copes is “likely guilty.” https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/citing-unconstitutional-search-via-stingray-judge-suppresses-murder-evidence/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/citing-unconstit... I wonder what it would have been like had that case been in Florida. Which has sweet inevitable evidence law.

abvdasker 7y ago
> The tools should be as powerful as possible. I think a lot of people would disagree with this premise. The argument against it is basically that abuse of powerful surveillance technologies is inevitable precisely because the technology is so powerful. In reality, law enforcement is only incentivized to catch criminals, not necessarily to protect people's privacy or personal freedoms, so LE will abuse these capabilities 100% of the time they have access to them. A more subtle argument is that bureaucratic oversight of LE is almost always impotent to reign them in and has every reason not to due so due to a lack of accountability. A "fair, ethical" system is fundamentally incompatible with one in which law enforcement has sweeping surveillance capabilities and the lack of oversight which always results from any sufficiently large/slow/complex legal system.
- no_opinions 7y ago
  > The argument against it is basically that abuse of powerful surveillance technologies is inevitable precisely because the technology is so powerful. What would be some examples of an abuse? What would be some examples of a powerful surveillance technology? For instance, what "surveillance technology" isn't already an internal diagnostic tool for day-to-day system administration for a telecom/service provider? Only difference is who picks the target and them having oversight (likely having to provide a predicate/rationale). Why is this so bad? If there's a lack of oversight, what rules and systems would you suggest to prevent abuse, as you define it?

ljm 7y ago

Watch Mr Robot and see this in action

rolph 7y ago

after reading through the comments i found this on hackaday, its from 2018; seems germaine to the current topics in thread: https://hackaday.com/tag/stingray/ https://hackaday.com/tag/stingray/ the first paragraph is an intro speech of sorts then the real content begins. There is an interesting article linked in that part so i want to bring it to the fore. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/dhs-confirms-presence-cell-site-simulators-us-capitol https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/dhs-confirms-presence-... it seems that a number of factions may have been using "stingray" devices and thier contemporary equivalents for some time.

bodka 7y ago

aSDASDASDASDASD

bodka 7y ago
HOW REPLY WORKS

zw123456 7y ago

Generally if the RSRP or RSSI increases significantly that is a dead give away you are on a stingray. You don't really need an app to see that (google how to see it for your phone type). Of course, it is always possible that your carrier just turned up a new site closer to you but that is not something that happens often and you can usually notice it. Some comments about mm-wave 5G, keep in mind that mm-wave != 5G. But on mm-wave stingray becomes more difficult due to the high directionality of short wavelengths. But at lower bands, there is no advantage of 5G over 4G in terms of resilience over stingray types of attacks (which are basically a L1 middleman attack, similar to age old wifi types of spoofs).

_salmon 7y ago
Watching signal strengths is all well and good, but you need historical data to compare to. This is a viable option for a few sites (maybe near where you live), but not an option when you're on the go.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

greyhair 7y ago

I have a femtocell in my home, because my small neighborhood sits in a dead zone. Not a repeater, a full femtocell. To the casual security conscious user, that is probably going to look like a 'stingray', since you will be walking down the street with a gradually dropping RSSI, when all at once, boom, you walk into a five bar signal and life is good. It covers about a 300 ft radius with the most blessedly beautiful signal you can imagine. Maxes out at 100Mb/S, since that is all the backhaul it gets from the ISP where it is connected. (Not that I am complaining about 100/100 in the house.) But it isn't a Stingray. It is a fully secure registered femtocell base station. Given that it hasn't moved in five years, it may well be on someone's map of established cell towers.

thatcat 7y ago
Can you use this device to enumerate imei of passers-by?
- greyhair 7y ago
  No. It is a closed secure box with ssl backhaul to the provider. I was involved in the chip architecture for the silicon that is used in the box as well as the software engineer involved in the secure boot path for the cellular modems. It is one large chip with all the modems and application processors in one chunk of silicon. No unencrypted data, air link or Ethernet back haul, ever leaves the die. From that, I am familiar with the physical design that the manufacturer implemented. (We did a lot of support work to get the manufacturer up and running) They even go so far as to have a physical 'self destruct' button within the box. If you try to physically open it, it will never boot again. The service provider states in the documentation (when you get the box) that if you tamper with the device such that the self-defeat gets activated, you have to pay full retail for the now dead box (they provided the femtocell for free if you live in a dead zone). I laughed when I opened the retail box and that was the first thing in the document stack. Basically a large font "you have been warned"