US Marshals Service Withholds Publicly-Available Data From Its Stingray Device FOIA Response
from the open-[secrets] dept
Overclassification and abuse of FOIA exemptions is a given with most of our nation's security/law enforcement agencies. Two agencies -- the DHS and the FBI -- both redacted publicly-available information on drone possession and usage. Why? Because no one will stop them. Public accountability isn't something these agencies embrace. Their real love is secrecy, obfuscation and an allegiance to the eternal protection of "techniques and procedures," even when the information has already been disseminated elsewhere.
MuckRock's Phil Mocek recently received responsive documents from the US Marshals Service on its Stingray usage. The Marshals Service is notoriously secretive about the Stingrays in its law enforcement stable and is equally infamous for the thug-like tactics it has deployed to hide documents from public records requests.
So protective is it of this information that its response to Mocek jumped the secrecy shark. Hidden behind the numerous black redaction bars is information freely available on an official government website.
While it appears the USMS is not under any nondisclosure agreement with the device manufacturer, the agency has withheld a wide range of basic information under an exemption meant to protect law enforcement techniques. However, much of the redacted data is already available online via a federal accounting website…As MuckRock's Shawn Musgrave points out, this information deemed too sensitive to be released to a FOIA requester can be found at the General Services Administration's website. The GSA handles a majority of government contracts and, as a government entity, is only allowed to display information deemed suitable for public consumption. The same information withheld by the US Marshals Service has been previously cleared for release on the GSA's site.
Particular item names and descriptions are universally redacted throughout the documents. But released invoices and purchase orders indicate that USMS spending on cell site simulators and related services totaled nearly $10 million between September 2009 and April 2014.
An overabundance of caution by the US Marshals Service? Maybe. Or maybe it's just accustomed to throwing plenty of black ink around when fielding FOIA requests. Either way, this withholding of publicly-available data suggests one thing: the USMS's justification for blotting out this info doesn't mean shit.
Extensive redactions throughout the document cache are made under a provision in the federal Freedom of Information Act — exemption (b)(7)(E), for the FOIA nerds — meant to protect law enforcement information.It's not that the US Marshals Service doesn't understand the correct deployment of FOIA exemptions. It just doesn't care. How a dollar amount can be both publicly-available through the GSA and a too-sensitive-for-the-public "technique or procedure" will never be explained by the wilfully opaque law enforcement agency. At best, it will suggest the redaction was an error. But more likely, it will be happy to stay quiet on the issue and allow the BS exemptions to speak for themselves.
Specifically, per the Justice Department’s own guidelines, this exemption covers information that "would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions”, or that “would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law."
The trouble is, much of the information blacked out by USMS FOIA officers is already available online to the general public, and hardly qualifies as law enforcement information as defined in this provision.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: foia, imsi catcher, stingray, us marshals
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Government in Action
Right Hand: Need to know, and you don't.
Left Hand: Don't you need two hands for that?
Right Hand: Sources and Methods restriction.
Left Hand: Your going to drop the ball.
Right Hand: What ball?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're actually making this tactic work.
So stop begging for documents and start demanding removal of the criminal's actual devices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You're actually making this tactic work.
Do you feel like starting a partisan sabotage campaign?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FOIA Ammendment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: FOIA Ammendment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: FOIA Ammendment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The capability most likely being concealed is that Stingray permits recording of all voice calls, without a warrant.
Possible other capabilities: Take over any phone, turn on any phone microphone, download software onto any phone, more?
Make up your own. The point is: they are concealing something that will raise alarms with everyone. There's no other reasonable explanation for this fight-to-the-death protection of the secrets of Stingray.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe our tendency towards moral panics can work in our favor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stingray
T he same is true for cell phone spying software. Anyone can buy this software. A google search for cell phone spyware gives numerous sellers of this software.
A cell phone can be stopped from tracking and tapping if it is placed in a Faraday Cage. A Faraday cage is a metal or conductive envelope that completely surrounds the electronic device and stops signals from going into or out of the cage.This can be accomplished by making a pouch out of a metallized ie conductive fabric. Search youtube for detracktor for a demonstration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stingray
Absolutely. But then the cellphone is kind of a boat anchor, isn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://wh.gov/iWPsK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the info is public- you can put 2+2 together yourself.
It's much worse then most people understand. No one with any credibility wants the kind of target publishing about this would place on them.
Saying cellphones are backdoored- is kinda like saying cars are killing machines. technically true..but semantics...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]