Privacy, geolocation, android, police, burglary

UltraTaco

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
150
Airplane mode ON when outside or not using phone. For everything else, CB radio.

The email arrived on a Tuesday afternoon in January, startling Zachary McCoy as he prepared to leave for his job at a restaurant in Gainesville, Florida.
It was from Google’s legal investigations support team, writing to let him know that local police had demanded information related to his Google account. The company said it would release the data unless he went to court and tried to block it. He had just seven days.


“I was hit with a really deep fear,” McCoy, 30, recalled, even though he couldn’t think of anything he’d done wrong. He had an Android phone, which was linked to his Google account, and, like millions of other Americans, he used an assortment of Google products, including Gmail and YouTube. Now police seemingly wanted access to all of it.
“I didn’t know what it was about, but I knew the police wanted to get something from me,” McCoy said in a recent interview. “I was afraid I was going to get charged with something, I don’t know what.”
There was one clue.
In the notice from Google was a case number. McCoy searched for it on the Gainesville Police Department’s website, and found a one-page investigation report on the burglary of an elderly woman’s home 10 months earlier. The crime had occurred less than a mile from the home that McCoy, who had recently earned an associate degree in computer programming, shared with two others.

Now McCoy was even more panicked and confused. He knew he had nothing to do with the break-in ─ he’d never even been to the victim’s house ─ and didn’t know anyone who might have. And he didn’t have much time to prove it.
McCoy worried that going straight to police would lead to his arrest. So he went to his parents’ home in St. Augustine, where, over dinner, he told them what was happening. They agreed to dip into their savings to pay for a lawyer.
The lawyer, Caleb Kenyon, dug around and learned that the notice had been prompted by a “geofence warrant,” a police surveillance tool that casts a virtual dragnet over crime scenes, sweeping up Google location data — drawn from users’ GPS, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and cellular connections — from everyone nearby.
The warrants, which have increased dramatically in the past two years, can help police find potential suspects when they have no leads. They also scoop up data from people who have nothing to do with the crime, often without their knowing ─ which Google itself has described as “a significant incursion on privacy.”

Do you have a story to share about how police use new technology or surveillance tools? Contact us
Still confused ─ and very worried ─ McCoy examined his phone. An avid biker, he used an exercise-tracking app, RunKeeper, to record his rides. The app relied on his phone’s location services, which fed his movements to Google. He looked up his route on the day of the March 29, 2019, burglary and saw that he had passed the victim’s house three times within an hour, part of his frequent loops through his neighborhood, he said.
“It was a nightmare scenario,” McCoy recalled. “I was using an app to see how many miles I rode my bike and now it was putting me at the scene of the crime. And I was the lead suspect.”
A powerful new tool
The victim was a 97-year-old woman who told police she was missing several pieces of jewelry, including an engagement ring, worth more than $2,000. Four days after she reported the crime, Gainesville police, looking for leads, went to an Alachua County judge with the warrant for Google.

In it, they demanded records of all devices using Google services that had been near the woman’s home when the burglary was thought to have taken place. The first batch of data would not include any identifying information. Police would sift through it for devices that seemed suspicious and ask Google for the names of their users.
Kenyon said police told him that they became particularly interested in McCoy’s device after reviewing the first batch of anonymized data. They didn’t know the identity of the device’s owner, so they returned to Google to ask for more information.

mn-1130_33e5b7462234ff418bbcece0296a4123.fit-1000w.jpgMcCoy made frequent loops through his neighborhood on his bike.Agnes Lopez / for NBC News
That request triggered the Jan. 14 notice the technology giant sent to McCoy, part of its general policy on notifying users about government requests for their information. The notice was McCoy’s only indication that police wanted his data.
Gainesville police declined to comment.

While privacy and civil liberties advocates have been concerned that geofence warrants violate constitutional protections from unreasonable searches, law enforcement authorities say those worries are overblown. They say police don’t obtain any identifying information about a Google user until they find a device that draws their suspicion. And the information alone is not enough to justify charging someone with a crime, they say.
Google geofence warrants have been used by police agencies around the country, including the FBI. Google said in a court filing last year that the requests from state and federal law enforcement authorities were increasing rapidly: by more than 1,500 percent from 2017 to 2018, and by 500 percent from 2018 to 2019.
“It’s a great tool and a great technology,” said Kevin Armbruster, a retired lieutenant with the Milwaukee Police Department, where he oversaw the use of high-tech investigative work, including geofence warrants.
Related
13p_82264c3bf224c29736ec70af0900cde4.focal-280x140.jpg
NEWSBank robber accuses police of illegally using Google location data to catch him
Milwaukee police have used Google geofence warrants to solve an array of crimes, including homicides, shootings, a string of robberies and kidnappings and a sexual assault involving an abduction, he said. “I would think the majority of citizens in the world would love the fact that we are putting violent offenders in jail,” Armbruster said.

There have been very few court challenges to Google geofence warrants, mainly because the warrants are done in secret and defense lawyers may not realize the tool was used to identify their clients. One exception is an accused bank robber in Midlothian, Virginia, who is fighting the charge by arguing the geofence warrant used against him was illegal. That case is pending.
‘You’re looking at the wrong guy’
Once McCoy realized his bike ride had placed him near the scene of the crime, he had a strong theory of why police had picked his device out of all the others swept up by the warrant. He and Kenyon set out to keep them from getting any more information about him ─ and persuade them that he was innocent.
Kenyon said he got on the phone with the detective on the case and told him, “You’re looking at the wrong guy.”
For most of his life, McCoy said, he had tried to live online anonymously, a habit that dated to the early days of the internet when there was less expectation that people would use their real names. He used pseudonyms on his social media accounts and the email account that Google used to notify him about the police investigation.

But until then, he hadn’t thought much about Google collecting information about him.
“I didn’t realize that by having location services on that Google was also keeping a log of where I was going,” McCoy said. “I’m sure it’s in their terms of service but I never read through those walls of text, and I don’t think most people do either.”
Just before the start of his ordeal, he’d listened to a call-in radio debate about the Department of Justice’s fight with Apple over access to an iPhone left by a Saudi national who’d gunned down several people at an air base in Pensacola, Florida, in December. He remembered some callers saying they had no problem with law enforcement having access to phone data, arguing that people had nothing to worry about as long as they didn’t break the law. Now McCoy thought the callers weren’t considering predicaments like his.
“If you’re innocent, that doesn’t mean you can’t be in the wrong place at the wrong time, like going on a bike ride in which your GPS puts you in a position where police suspect you of a crime you didn’t commit,” McCoy said.
Related
36p_d35f8b6d81b2c3c2f288f3f34c7b7ae7.focal-280x140.jpg
NEWSUNC campus police used geofencing tech to monitor antiracism protestors
On Jan. 31, Kenyon filed a motion in Alachua County civil court to render the warrant “null and void” and to block the release of any further information about McCoy, identifying him only as “John Doe.” At that point, Google had not turned over any data that identified McCoy but would have done so if Kenyon hadn’t intervened. Kenyon argued that the warrant was unconstitutional because it allowed police to conduct sweeping searches of phone data from untold numbers of people in order to find a single suspect.

That approach, Kenyon said, flipped on its head the traditional method of seeking a search warrant, in which police target a person they already suspect.
“This geofence warrant effectively blindly casts a net backwards in time hoping to ensnare a burglar,” Kenyon wrote. “This concept is akin to the plotline in many a science fiction film featuring a dystopian, fascist government.”
Cleared by the same data
The filing seemed to give law enforcement authorities second thoughts about the warrant. Not long afterward, Kenyon said, a lawyer in the state attorney’s office assigned to represent the Gainesville Police Department told him there were details in the motion that led them to believe that Kenyon’s client was not the burglar. The state attorney’s office withdrew the warrant, asserting in a court filing that it was no longer necessary. The office did not respond to a request for comment.

Kenyon said that in a visit to his office, the detective acknowledged that police no longer considered his client a suspect.
On Feb. 24, Kenyon dropped his legal challenge.
The case ended well for McCoy, Kenyon said, but “the larger privacy fight will go unanswered.”
Related
-kh_0d64effef3ec63e8f6dcc0361aae243c.focal-280x140.jpg
NEWSThe police demanded he unlock his cellphone. He didn't — and spent 44 days in jail.
Even then, Kenyon wanted to make sure police didn’t have lingering doubts about McCoy, whom they still knew only as “John Doe.” So he met with the detective again and showed him screenshots of his client’s Google location history, including data recorded by RunKeeper. The maps showed months of bike rides past the burglarized home.

In the end, the same location data that raised police suspicions of McCoy also helped to vindicate him, Kenyon said. “But there was no knowing what law enforcement was going to do with that data when they got it behind closed doors. Not that I distrust them, but I wouldn’t trust them not to arrest someone.”
He pointed to an Arizona case in which a man was mistakenly arrested and jailed for murder largely based on Google data received from a geofence warrant.
McCoy said he may have ended up in a similar spot if his parents hadn’t given him several thousand dollars to hire Kenyon.
He regrets having to spend that money. He also thinks about the elderly burglary victim. Police said they have not made any arrests.

“I’m definitely sorry that happened to her, and I’m glad police were trying to solve it,” McCoy said. “But it just seems like a really broad net for them to cast. What’s the cost-benefit? How many innocent people do we have to harass https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...-ride-past-burglarized-home-made-him-n1151761
 
I'm sorry, but no -- I'm not going to cut my phone off from the outside world. Please don't give into simplistic, unthinking paranoia as you appear to be right now.

McCoy's problem was that he was using a fitness app that was continuously logging his location. He likely wouldn't have been roped into that case if he either wasn't using the app or disabled the location sharing.

And moreover, even if you're concerned about what Google might be doing with Android on a background level... well, there is this radical concept of using an iPhone instead. I don't think Google is as nefarious as some people believe, but you don't have to hand your life over to the company, either.
 
It's almost like you didn't read your own article. They used non-identifiable information looking for patterns before looking for specific people. They literally did not have a name to work with until they did more homework. After they narrowed it down, then they started investigating certain individuals. When this guy demonstrated the location was used for some other app and he was in the area, but had a legitimate reason to be there, they dropped their investigation into him (actually I think they dropped it before he presented any info).

I don't know how else you would like police to attempt to solve crimes. You can't have it both ways. You can't complain about a lack of privacy, complain when police try to use tools at their disposal to solve crimes, and then complain when police aren't allowed to use those tools and crimes go unsolved.
 
Last edited:
This "post" looks like one of those auto-aggregated news feed posts where contradicting articles feed into the same place.... 🤔
 
The guy doesn't look like he's the athletic type. He was totally scoping that house out to rob it.

In all seriousness though, I hope he will stop using all these apps now that track him.
 
Either it's Google, the app or the phone service provider / carrier ... there's always someone tracking you. Using an iPhone isn't going to prevent that. Sure Apple may be more resistant to giving up your data (maybe), AT&T, Verizon or TMobile still have access to similar / same data and they sure are not going to fight a warrant for you.

Besides, I know plenty of iPhone users in my office that still use Google services / Maps. So yep the Googs can still get you even on iPhone.
 
Either it's Google, the app or the phone service provider / carrier ... there's always someone tracking you. Using an iPhone isn't going to prevent that. Sure Apple may be more resistant to giving up your data (maybe), AT&T, Verizon or TMobile still have access to similar / same data and they sure are not going to fight a warrant for you.

Besides, I know plenty of iPhone users in my office that still use Google services / Maps. So yep the Googs can still get you even on iPhone.

Why would they fight a warrant? In order to get a warrant, some police-like agency has already written an affidavit of probable cause and a judge has read and approved it. Fighting it is a no-win situation. If the same police-like agency just showed up and asked for random subscriber information, that's a different story.
 
The original article isn't about police using normal warrants - it's about those geo-fence warrants that the cops are using to snap up buckets of "phone IP/MAC/SIM data" for whoever happens to be in the area. That part is likely unconstitutional.

What I was referring to was that the same data is also probably available from other sources including the phone carriers themselves even if Google / Apple didn't cooperate themselves.

QUOTE="kirbyrj, post: 1044530010, member: 100718"]
Why would they fight a warrant? In order to get a warrant, some police-like agency has already written an affidavit of probable cause and a judge has read and approved it. Fighting it is a no-win situation. If the same police-like agency just showed up and asked for random subscriber information, that's a different story.
[/QUOTE]
 
Back
Top