Feds Also Using 'Reverse Warrants' To Gather Location/Identifying Info On Thousands Of Non-Suspects
from the just-google-it dept
Because nearly everyone carries a tracking device on their person these days, it's become a whole lot easier for the government to find out where everybody's been. It's TinEye but for people, and it appears to be a new go-to tool for law enforcement. What used to be officers canvassing the area where a crime took place is now a warrant sent to Google to obtain location data and identifying info for all people and devices in the area.
These so-called "reverse warrants" first started coming to light earlier this year. The Raleigh Police Department (NC) was serving warrants to Google in hopes of figuring out who to suspect of committing crimes, rather than having a suspect in mind and working forward from there. The warrants were of the "general" variety, guaranteed to give the RPD location/identifying info of hundreds of non-suspects who just happened to be in the area. There's some evidence Google has pushed back against these warrants, but it hasn't been enough to deter law enforcement from continuing to use Google as one-stop shopping to bulk location/identifying info.
This practice isn't limited to the local boys. Thomas Brewster of Forbes has obtained a warrant [PDF] showing the FBI is doing the same thing.
The most recent order on Google, unearthed by Forbes earlier this week, came from the FBI in Henrico, Virginia. They went to Google after four separate robberies in which unidentified, armed individuals entered and stole from the same Dollar Tree store between March and September this year. The manager of the Dollar Tree was also robbed at gunpoint while dropping off money at a Wells Fargo night-deposit box located just down the road from the store.
The warrant asks for location histories held by Google for anyone within three separate areas—including regions around the Dollar Tree store and the Wells Fargo address—during the times and days the five robberies took place. The FBI also wanted identifying information of Google account holders in those areas, two of which had a 375-meter radius. The other had a 300-meter radius.
Since Dollar Tree stores are never found thousands of feet away from other businesses and residences, the information demanded of Google would include hundreds or thousands of innocent people who live or work near the targeted store.
This isn't the way warrants work. Or, at least, this isn't how they're supposed to work. Unfortunately, the FBI's stated probable cause for demanding this info isn't attached to the document Forbes obtained, so it's unclear how the FBI talked a judge into signing off on this. What the returned warrant does show is no records were returned, suggesting Google is pushing back against broad requests for data that appear to be unsupported by probable cause.
While this may be the digital equivalent of canvassing nearby businesses and residences to search for suspects, these orders make compliance compulsory by eliminating the citizenry. It appears the government believes the combination of warrants and third-party data makes gathering info on hundreds or thousands of non-suspects constitutional. The FBI's warrant also came with an indefinite gag order, so no one included in the search radius had any idea federal law enforcement wanted to know who they were or where they'd been.
This search tactic will continue to be deployed until a court puts an end to it. Without more data, it's hard to say how often magistrates approve or reject these reverse warrants. All we know is some warrants have been approved. And in some cases, Google has refused to provide the data. I'm sure law enforcement knows these demands for data aren't completely constitutional, which may be why we haven't seen any agency bring Google to court for refusing to comply. Additional judicial scrutiny isn't going to do these warrants any favors.
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: 4th amendment, doj, fbi, location info, reverse warrants, warrants
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Consitution
~Both Parties
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The more and more this continues the more you will be literally required to participate or become a criminal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What would we call 'failure to surveil yourself'? I vote for preemptive spoliation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So I pretty much treat it like a land line 99.99% of the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Pen register" data. Throw away your phone, then.
If this new data source makes police work easier and more efficient, why are you against the "way teh internets are sposed to work"?
It's okay so long as gov't NON-prosecutes the innocent. That's the way it works. Gov't collects all the facts it can in EVERY case. Never know when one is crucial.
Why is it good if this freely-given-away data is held by a corporation, and bad if the gov't gets it? You're self-contradictory. A true libertarian recognizes that corporations are evil, abusive, and tyrannical TOO, they're no good alternative to gov't.
Oh, and your credit to Google for supposedly fighting this is just transparent shilling. You don't know that Google opposed it at all, just assert.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Pen register" data. Throw away your phone, then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Pen register" data. Throw away your phone, then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why Google?
Wouldn't it be better to find out from the telcos who own the nearest cell phone towers what phones registered themselves with their towers in the time frame they are focused on?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why Google?
GPS is FAR more accurate then cell tower guessing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why Google?
Apple is despised by law enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You have all the privacy you want as long as you don't:
Failure to avoid all of the above voids your privacy rights, or so our government would have you believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Go back to raving about Orange Man Bad.
Or constitution destroying Social Justice Hillary.
We pay good money for the media to keep everyone outraged. You're not supposed to ask this sort of question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I've watched and listened and have witnessed this government being usurped and corroded for more than five decades. They have wanted to get into everybody's bedroom for such a long time to spy on people for who knows what nefarious reasons. I've seen the technological advances year after year allowing them to do just that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well if the FBI is doing it...
...that implies it is totally working way better for overreaching law-enforcement than it should.
Which suggests that Google may be cooperating a bit too much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well if the FBI is doing it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Burners are still in vogue yes?
Pro-criminals and terrorists still use short-term disposable burners, yes? So this kind of reverse-warrant-thing is probably useless for any crime that might actually warrant Google spilling its beans.
Yes?
I don't know, when I think about crime and active resistance (for purposes of fiction-writing, of course) I tend to consider how the culprit covers his tracks and vanishes into air (or implicates someone else). Maybe I'm overestimating our criminal element.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Burners are still in vogue yes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its legit...get over it
I do agree that the gag order is not legal and should be stopped. Thats the same bullshit as mational security letters....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Its legit...get over it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Its legit...get over it
The whole purpose of a warrant is to make sure law enforcement adheres to the rules. This is effectively a warrant for perhaps thousands of people and is open to abuse.
It also opens people up to arrest for crimes they didn't commit just by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. GPS can be wildly inaccurate, and there is plenty of room for someone to be picking up a pack of smokes at the party store at the other end of the strip mall from the Dollar General.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
General warrants
General warrants are supposed to be illegal. Warrants are supposed to be very specific, and other crimes discovered during that search are supposed to be unprosecutable without an additional (non-retroactive) warrant.
It is a perversion of the justice system that warrants have become generalized, just as it is a perversion of justice that a traffic stop can be used to search or identify a passenger.
This is a dissolution of justice in the favor of law enforcement as is part of the pavement of our road into becoming a police state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]