For the past few decades, law enforcement has used devices called stingrays to detect the location and behavior of people through their phones. Also known as IMSI catchers or cell-site simulators, stingrays are devices that pretend to be cell towers to retrieve information from nearby phones. They broadcast signals stronger than surrounding cell towers to trick phones into connecting with them, which easily exposes the phone’s IMSI number and potentially various other information. IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) numbers are essentially the IDs of phones, and they can be used to figure out an owner’s name and address, the history of cell towers the phone has connected to, and more.
Stingray Use in the United States
In the U.S., there are at least 75 federal agencies across 27 states (plus D.C.) that are using stingrays, and there are likely many more due to how information about the use of stingrays is largely kept secret. Stingrays have been used by law enforcement to find criminals and unearth their behaviors, but some have pushed back on this, arguing that police need warrants to use stingrays and get this information. At the moment, there is no federal law that requires warrants for stingray use, but there are several state laws that do require warrants, including Utah’s. The Justice Department does have a policy that requires federal agents to have warrants to use stingrays for criminal cases, but this does not apply to exigent circumstances, which can be vague. Justice Department policies are also not actual laws. Plus, due to the secrecy of stingrays, police could be using them without the knowledge of other people.
The Privacy Interests
Those who aren’t so pleased about stingrays point to the potential harms they can impose. First, when using stingrays to get information from a phone, it is often, if not always, the case that other phones in the vicinity are also affected, and as such many innocents’ information are retrieved as well. There is also concern over what information is conveyed to the stingray. Other than IMSI numbers, stingrays can also access the contents of phone calls, text messages, and emails, and they can bypass data encryption by downgrading the phone’s connection to 2G to easily uncover the contents. Many people may not be comfortable knowing this information can be easily discovered by officials. Finally, there is the potential for those using stingrays to install malware on phones. Stingrays can either install malware directly or direct the phone to a website that contains malware.
The Public Safety Interests
Those in favor of stingrays note their usefulness in law enforcement. Stingrays have been used many times to track down criminals and present evidence for their prosecutions. They can also be used on devices other than mobile phones. Police were able to find Daniel Rigmaiden, an identity thief, through his Verizon AirCard. Rigmaiden faked his identity for almost a decade to avoid paying taxes and even to file tax returns as people who were deceased, accumulating a huge amount of wealth. He hid his tracks very well, and it was only with the use of stingrays that he was found. Without stingrays, it would have been near impossible to track him down. Another use of stingrays is jamming bomb detonators that are activated by phones. And though there is a lot of secrecy surrounding stingrays, authorities justify this secrecy by claiming that it would be easier for criminals to circumvent stingrays once they know how they work.
Conclusion
The pros and cons of stingrays have led people to debate on how they should be used by law enforcement. Some argue that police should require a warrant, while others argue that this requirement will get in the way of cases that require swift action to find suspects. Personally, while I can’t deny the usefulness of stingrays, I do think that police should need warrants to use them. Phones have become necessities for our lives now, and they hold plenty of private information that we would not expect others to be able to see. I think police should be able to use this technology, but not however they please without accountability. They should get a warrant before prying into someone’s privacy, especially since the use of stingrays affects all phones in the area, not just the suspect’s. Do you think law enforcement should be required to have a warrant before using stingrays?
References
Farivar, Cyrus. “Judge Rules in Favor of ‘Likely Guilty’ Murder Suspect Found via Stingray.” Ars Technica, Condé Nast, 26 Apr. 2016, https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/citing-unconstitutional-search-via-stingray-judge-suppresses-murder-evidence/.
Smail, Gretchen. “This Netflix DOC Shows How an IRS Scammer Uncovered Secret Spy Technology.” Bustle, 16 June 2022, https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/where-daniel-rigmaiden-is-now-web-of-make-believe.
“Stingray Tracking Devices: Who's Got Them?” American Civil Liberties Union, Nov. 2018, https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/stingray-tracking-devices-whos-got-them.
Zetter, Kim. “What Are Stingrays and Dirtboxes?” The Intercept, First Look Institute, 31 July 2020, https://theintercept.com/2020/07/31/protests-surveillance-stingrays-dirtboxes-phone-tracking/.
I agree that police should be required to have a warrant before utilizing stingrays. I had never heard of stingrays before, so this was interesting to read. But just as with any other way of searching people, government officials should be required to have a warrant beforehand. Searching someone's cell phone is no different. I am especially concerned since it was mentioned stingrays often extract data from multiple phones, not just the targeted one. I wonder how that would work with a search warrant. The police should need a warrant to target that one phone, but what about all the other ones that get picked up on as collateral damage? It is not as if they can get a search warrant for every phone that may or may not be in the vicinity. Either way, I feel like a search warrant should be necessary but I do not know the logistics of how that would pan out.
ReplyDeleteI think if they keep the pursuit of a suspect quiet, and law enforcement can do their due diligence correctly, the logistics work out fine. I just think sometimes stingrays can be used by law enforcement unethically, and thus the issue of privacy arises.
DeleteI also think that the police should obtain a warrant before using stingrays. They already need a warrant to unlock your phone if they arrest you, and using a stingray seems like an even greater invasion of privacy. I also think that there should be some policy in place to prevent the police abusing this technology. I would like to know more about what information is being gathered, how it is being used, and how quickly it is discarded if it is not relevant to the investigation. I am concerned that other people who are not the subject of the warrant could be harmed by the stingray if there are not rules in place that protect them.
ReplyDeleteGreat comment. I definitely agree with you in that I want to see what information police must have on an individual to justify tracking them via a stingray, and what information they gather, whether in public or in private, about the individual.
DeleteAgain, I think that this issue of privacy stems from consent. Because often times law enforcement is unable to notify the people they are tracking, due to the fact that they may expose themselves, the lack of consent in this case makes it so that they need at the very least, a warrant to continue their practices of tracking individuals and relaying that information to prosecute them. I think there definitely need to be established rules in place to ensure that individuals, are not having their implicit privacy rights violated, and that law enforcement is using the stingrays in an ethical manner. To this end, there needs to be a warrant issued and improved through a court order by a judge, and law enforcement must make ethical approaches when tracking citizens with stingrays moving forward.
ReplyDeleteThis is really interesting to me, because I hadn't been exposed to the term stingrays before and didn't really understand the extent of its effects. I might've even been pro-use of them, but I didn't really consider how it could be used to actually manipulate the device with malware and access the full contents, not just the location through usage of the cell service. I think that would be a much better and safer way to use technology like this, stripped to the bare minimum of "it connects to this cell tower, this is where the phone is," especially if its priority benefit is for safety and law enforcement. Since there is so much data that can be retrieved, I definitely think that this should be a situation where warrants are necessary to access them.
ReplyDeleteHi Wen! I completely agree with your comment about requiring warrants. I think, though, if law enforcement does need to retrieve extra data they should be able to do it as long as there is extensive regulation and probable cause.
DeleteThanks for posting Andrew! I hadn't heard of stingrays before and obviously didn't understand the pros and cons of them. I think that with any search, whether physical or digital, a warrant should be required. Without standards and regulations in place, abuse of power can occur. I think that stingrays can be a valuable tool in protecting public safety but its use should be regulated and there should be a clear cause. Additionally, I'd be interested to find out what happens to the data of unsuspecting and innocent bystanders.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, after reading this post, I would argue that stingrays should only be used when there is no other option when investigating criminal matters. Aditionally, I wonder what police do with irrelevant information collected with a stingray. How and when is the use of a stingray deemed necessary? Due to Stingrays affecting all cellular phones within a certain range, police definetly should not be able to use them without a warrant. However, if a warrant is needed to be able to use a stingray, would it not be a beter option to use that warrant for a home search or something more direct? My main concern around stingrays is that they seem most effective when collecting information in order to issue a warant, however they are also incredibly invasive and collect information indiscriminantly from all cellular devices within its range.
ReplyDeletePersonally, this is a tool that should only be used in the interests of national security, such as preventing the detonation of bombs through phones, the tracking of high profile terrorists, etc.. In the case regarding the use of thermal imaging to conclude that a man was growing weed in his house, it was found to be against his privacy - I do not see how this is different. Most people are largely unaware of stingrays, I was until this post, and in the case with the thermal camera it was found that he had reasonable expectations of privacy. I think it is reasonable that these are used when a warrant is issued, but I think it would be best if any unrelated information collected was deleted.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that police should be required to obtain a warrant before using stingray devices. If we take into consideration that the Supreme Court deems cell phones as a necessity for modern life, and they have said that phones should not be searched without a warrant, I don’t see how accessing the phones from a remote location via fake cell towers is even something that is legal without obtaining a warrant. There is definitely a need for access in terms of security and public safety, but if there is a suspected threat then they can go get the warrant and use the devices to gather information.
ReplyDeleteI also think that if there is a large event, such as the Super Bowl, they could obtain a warrant to survey the area to protect against threats if they are worried about it, but I don’t think they should be able to search an entire area unless they obtain a warrant first.
I do agree with your statement that the police should use stingrays. Stingrays are helpful for gathering useful information that can be used be used to either stop bombs or stop other crimes. However, I do think the police and other forms of government should ensure that people outside of the force cannot access the stringrays easily. We want to use the stingrays for good, and we don't want people outside using it for crimes. Also polices should have a warrant in order to use stringrays.
ReplyDeleteI think unless there is an immediate threat to public safety, such as a bomb there needs to be strict measures in place for when stingrays can be used. There is no doubt that they can be extremely useful and even beneficial. Reading your article I was shocked by the range of things stingrays are able to do, which is what makes me concerned about them.
ReplyDeleteI had never learned about stingrays before, so thanks for such a great introduction to them. These devices are quite scary and I can see why people can have very mixed opinions about them. Phones and communication devices often have very private information that they might not so is so easily accessible to law enforcement without a warrant. They can be useful with their information gathering, but I think this information they are finding should need a warrant to access and gather.
ReplyDeleteChloe hagan
Delete