I have been following the developments about the use
of cell site simulators by law enforcement agencies in the United States over the past year.
Disclosure of the use of
cell site simulators in Canada is a precondition to meaningful debate — in public, in the courts and among law makers — in order to ensure that the use of invasive technology is in compliance with s. 8 of the Charter of Rights that protects all Canadians from unreasonable search and seizure.
The amici curiae brief submits, at p. 8, that use of
cell site simulator technology must «at least be constrained by a probable cause warrant that mandates minimization of innocent parties» data» citing Berger v New York, 388 US 41, 57 - 9 (1967) where similar protections were required for wiretapping.
It calls for Congress to pass legislation that creates a clear, national framework to ensure that
cell site simulators do not infringe on citizens» constitutional rights.
The Department of Homeland Security today said it has
encountered cell site simulators being used in Washington, D.C., in what appears to be an effort to spy on Americans.
Last year Harris Corp., the Melbourne, Fla., company that makes the majority
of cell site simulators, went so far as to petition the Federal Communications Commission to block a FOIA request for user manuals for some of the company's products.
The judge, who reviewed the deal, said the FBI instructed the police to drop criminal charges instead of revealing «any information concerning
the cell site simulator or its use.»
There are three examples of how law enforcement typically use stingrays for surveillance: First, law enforcement officials may use
the cell site simulator with the known cell phone number of a targeted individual in order to determine that individual's location.
One such document recently revealed that the Baltimore Police Department has used
a cell site simulator 4,300 times since 2007 and signed a nondisclosure agreement with the FBI that instructed prosecutors to drop cases rather than reveal the department's use of the stingray.
There is little information in Canada about law enforcement's use of
cell site simulators.
On December 29, 2015, the American Civil Liberties Union filed an amici curiae brief with the ACLU of Maryland and the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the first known case where a motions judge suppressed evidence as a result of the warrantless use of
a cell site simulator by the police.
For the reasons above, EFF opposes police use of
cell site simulators.
This means that cellular phones can easily be tricked into connecting to
a cell site simulator without any indication to the owner.
Law enforcement officers in Washington, D.C. violated the Fourth Amendment when they used
a cell site simulator to locate a suspect without a warrant, a D.C. appeals court ruled on Thursday.