SoylentNews

NY State Supreme Court: Stingrays Act as "an Instrument of Eavesdropping"

posted by martyb on Monday November 20 2017, @02:16PM   
from the barbed-response dept.

Fnord666 writes:

A New York state judge has concluded that a powerful police surveillance tool known as a stingray, a device that spoofs legitimate mobile phone towers, performs a "search" and therefore requires a warrant under most circumstances.

As a New York State Supreme Court judge in Brooklyn ruled earlier this month in an attempted murder case, New York Police Department officers should have sought a standard, probable cause-driven warrant before using the invasive device.

The Empire State court joins others nationwide in reaching this conclusion. In September, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals also found that stingrays normally require a warrant, as did a federal judge in Oakland, California, back in August.

According to The New York Times, which first reported the case on Wednesday, People v. Gordon is believed to be the first stingray-related case connected to the country's largest city police force.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/if-nypd-cops-want-to-snoop-on-your-phone-they-need-a-warrant-judge-rules/

---

Original Submission

• Re:They need to spend less time... Re:They need to spend less time... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:29PM (3 children)

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:29PM (#599264)

  You can't blame 'em. "We really need to hear what that guy is saying." "Well gee, Jim, we got this device right here that does just that, although its use is legally ambiguous. A judge would probably say no to letting us use it, but the current law indicates that we can use it to make an arrest." "Let's use it, find out what we can, and let the courts figure out if it counts."
  
  Later - Courts say it doesn't count without a warrant.
  
  Later - "Jim, we need to get a warrant to use that thingy. I know a judge that can have it to us by tomorrow."
  
  This is pretty much the system working as intended - with the judicial branch providing a check/balance on the power of the executive branch.

  Parent

• Re:They need to spend less time... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:40PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:40PM (#599268)

  And there you have it folks. This is pretty much how it works in real life...

  Parent

• Re:They need to spend less time... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:52PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:52PM (#599366)

  Since these things necessarily slurp up data from more than just the intended target, they shouldn't be able to use them at all, even with a warrant. They can't even remotely guarantee specificity with this.

  Parent

• Re:They need to spend less time... (Score: 1) by anubi on Tuesday November 21 2017, @03:29AM

  by anubi (2828) on Tuesday November 21 2017, @03:29AM (#599511) Journal

  I would use it to see if I was barking up the right tree or wasting my time.

  Sure, I could not enter anything I got as evidence, but I could sure use it to tell me where to look to get evidence.

  Ever since the telephone came out, it never has been private, albeit the latest incarnations offer far more privacy than any of the previous incarnations I ever used.

  Its foolhardy to cook up problems on the phone. Especially these days with every call being logged and kept with almost no effort at all.

  If I were to try to communicate covertly, it would be public wifi spots, MAC spoofing, and custom coded "instant messenger" programs using nonstandard ports and nonstandard protocols.

  --
  "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  Parent