Michigan cops use 'data extraction devices'

[philw]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20055431-1.html

ACLU wants to know how Michigan cops use 'data extraction devices'


This machine could let police see all of your photos. Even that one.

(Credit: Matt Hickey/Cellebrite)
Editor's note: This story has been updated throughout based on comment from both the Michigan State Police and the ACLU of Michigan. See below for details.

The Michigan State Police have a handful of portable machines called "extraction devices" that have the potential to download personal information from motorists they pull over, and the ACLU would like to know more about them.

The devices, sold by a company called Cellebrite, can download text messages, photos, video, and even GPS data from most brands of cell phones. The handheld machines have various interfaces to work with different models and can even bypass security passwords and access some information.

The problem, as the ACLU sees it, is that accessing a citizen's private phone information when there's no probable cause could create a violation of the Constitution's 4th Amendment, which protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures.

To that end, it's petitioning the MSP to turn over information about its use of the devices under the Freedom of Information Act. The MSP said it's happy to comply, that is, if the ACLU provides them with a processing fee in excess of $500,000. That's more than $100,000 for each of the five devices the MSP says it has in use.

The ACLU, for its part, says that the fee is odious, and that a public policing agency has a duty to its citizens to be open. "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," Mark Fancher, an attorney for the ACLU, told Detroit's WDIV.

As of yet there's no suit, but one is likely if the MSP sticks to its proverbial guns and refuses to hand over information about how it's using the cell phone snooping devices, without being first paid. If litigation does come, the outcome may set a precedent that would have far-reaching effects, and might make a device that most of us carry a pocket battleground in the war of digital privacy.

Update on April 20 at 11:50 p.m.: The Michigan State Police later issued a statement saying that it only uses the data-extraction devices after obtaining a search warrant or consent from a cell phone's owner. See our story here for more details.

Correction on April 21 at 5:45 p.m.: This story initially mischaracterized the nature of the ACLU of Michigan's complaint. The ACLU is not making any accusations of misuse on the part of the Michigan State Police. It is simply asking for more information on the MSP's policies and history of using the devices.

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

Michigan: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops

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.

they had want to get a warrant first as well

[Frosty]

Makes me glad I don't have a cell phone and I don't live in MSP's area

[tombogan03884]

But it's such a great tool in the "War on drugs your civil rights"   

[Ichiban]

Given the not so new news that the smart phones track you location via GPS and record it, this gives the police a wealth of information.  Of course, all of these illegal searches were "voluntary" so there is no forth amendment violation.  Kind of like a cop asking you to open your trunk.  As long as it is posed as a question and you voluntarily comply they are in the clear.  Of course refusal means that you have must something to hide so then the bullying and threats start.

In the words of Nancy Regan:  Just say "No."

[tombogan03884]

"I have been advised not to willingly surrender any of my civil rights. You can look any where you please once you show me a warrant to search."

[Sponsor]

[blackwolfe]

Couple of notes on this.

I think all new cell phones are required to have GPS technology built in.

Modern vehicles have "black boxes" built into them for maintenace diagnostics.  The same "black box" records information that is beneficial to law enforcement and can and has been used in prosecutions.

If you are ever detained by law enforcement such as sitting in the back of a police car following an accident or traffic stop and you have left your wallet, drivers license, insurance, registration, etc, in your car, do not give LE permission to get it for you.  From what I have been told, if you have given them permission to retrieve it for you, you have essentially given permission for them to search your vehicle.

If you say no to a search they may very well try to guilt trip you into it.  LE may also "hold" you, untill they get a dog on scene to sniff out the vehicle around the outside for which they do not need a warrant.  Some dogs are trained and capable of alerting to more than one type of contraband such as drugs and explosives.  I have heard that dogs trained in explosives may alert on ammunition.  If a dog alerts on your vehicle, it will be searched, although I belive LE may still have to get a warrant to do so, but will be issued one as having a dog alert on your vehicle is sufficent to obtain a warrant.

Almost all cash will test positive for drug residue and could become subject to forfieture.

I am not a lawyer and don't play one.  I believe this information to be correct as I have heard this from several sources including LE, lawyers, and a judge.

[fightingquaker13]

You are pretty much right Blackwolfe.
To search a car, cops don't need probable cause, just reasonable sucpicion (the trunk excepted). They can "frisk" the car. Basically, they need to state a good reason, say 30% accurate. The dog gives them probable cause, about a 50% standard, to search the whole thing. However, and here is the key point, if you consent to the search it doesn't matter if they met their burden of proof. You forfeited your rights. If you say no and they search anyway, it is contestable in court. You may lose,but its still an issue. If you say yes, you're just flat out screwed. Its like the right to remain silent and have an attorney present. Read the large print and take advantage of this. You aren't going to talk yourself out of anyhing once the cuffs go on. The cops are not your friends. Make them do it the hard way and hope they screw up. Your lawyer will thank you for it.
FQ13

[kmitch200]

If you say no to a search they may very well try to guilt trip you into it.

Cops have tried this before on me many years ago.

"Can I search your car?"

No.

"Why, do have something to hide?"

Do you have something to look for?   They didn't search. Piss on 'em. (figuratively, not literally)

Almost all cash will test positive for drug residue and could become subject to forfieture.

This has been contested and won in court. While quite true that your cash can have drug residue on it, so will the cash of the cops, state attys and judge. It still may be seized but there are ways to get it back.

See:  http://www.ndsn.org/dec94/dog.html

[pioneer]

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution...............ALL rights reserved.

I find myself in the highly unusual position of siding with the ACLU on this one.  Michigan cops are way over the line. 

[pioneer]

Of course, all of these illegal searches were "voluntary" so there is no forth amendment violation.  Kind of like a cop asking you to open your trunk.  As long as it is posed as a question and you voluntarily comply they are in the clear.  Of course refusal means that you have must something to hide so then the bullying and threats start. 

Based on my LEO training with the local prosecutor (Oregon) I can offer the following advice, keeping in mind that I am not now, nor have I ever been a lawyer.  If the search is voluntary, it is not by definition illegal. 

Some police officers try to turn every traffic stop into a drug case.  I didn't do that unless it was a profile stop.  (Nothing racial, but a real profile stop is someone leaving a location where drug dealing is known to go on.)  Find a real reason to make a traffic stop, get license, registration, etc and deal with the traffic violation.  Give a verbal warning for the traffic infraction, return documents and say to the driver, "you are free to go." 

Immediately engage the driver in casual conversation.  Something like; “Mr. Jones, I noticed that you just drove away from that green house on the corner.  How well do you know the person (name if known) who lives there?  Are you aware that the person who lives at that house is known to be a drug dealer? 

You aren’t a drug dealer, are you?  No, I didn’t think you were. 

I hope you can understand why I would be suspicious of that.  Do you have any drugs on you, or in your car? 

No?  Just to satisfy my curiosity, do you mind if I look in your car? 

(It’s amazing how many people who are holding dope allow a consent search.)

This is where it gets critical.  Some officers may “bully” or lean on you to allow a search, but you have the absolute right to refuse.  Ask; “Am I free to leave?”  (If you are not free to leave, you are under arrest and visiting a suspicious house is not probable cause to arrest.)   

Sometimes there is a legitimate reason to profile drug customers, or mules.  The whole idea is for the word to get back to the dealer that the cops are watching, so they will feel the heat and set up business elsewhere.  As with any other law enforcement tool, some officers will get over zealous and abuse it. 

Keep in mind, a consent search can be withdrawn at any time.