NYPD Documents on Wi-Fi Interception Devices

Joseph Cox filed this request with the New York City Police Department of New York City, NY.
Tracking # 2016-PL-3409
Est. Completion None
No Responsive Documents


From: Derek Mitch

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

### Background ###

This request seeks records regarding the acquisition, possession, and use of wi-fi interception devices.

Wi-fi interception devices intercept a wide-range of data from nearby smartphones, such as social media passwords, emails, Dropbox contents, the phone's previous locations, contact list, photos, internet browsing history, and technical details related to the phone itself, such as its MAC address, model, and operating system. A media report on these devices can be found here: https://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-boxes-that-can-steal-your-social-media-and-dropbox-passwords-for-the-cops

One of these wi-fi interception devices is “InterApp,” made by Israeli company Rayzone Group: https://www.scribd.com/doc/291798648/En-brochure-Interapp

Another is “WINT,” made by Wintego: https://www.scribd.com/doc/291798739/1321-Wintego-Brochure

And a third is “Mabit,” an “app and cloud interception system,” from Israeli company Magen 100: http://i-hls.com/2015/02/israeli-system-intercepts-cloud-stored-data/

These companies market wi-fi interception devices to law enforcement, as well as other types of government agencies.

Recommended places to deploy wi-fi interception devices include borders, busy city areas, and large public events, according to Magen 100's website: http://www.ma-gen.com/. Product brochures claim that the devices require minimal training to use, and leave no forensic traces on monitored smartphones.

### Request ###

Please provide copies of the following records created from January 1, 2010 to the present:

- All policies, guidelines, rules, practices, or legal analysis regarding the use of wi-fi interception devices, including those concerning:
1) restrictions on when, how, and against whom they may be used
2) what information can be acquired using this technology
3) the possibility of disruption of lawful communications
4) protections for non-targets
5) limitations on retention and use of collected data
6) when a warrant or other legal process must be obtained
7) deployment of this technology in investigations conducted with other agencies or at the request of other agencies
8) disclosure of information acquired using this technology to other agencies, and
9) when the existence and use of wi-fi interception devices may be revealed to the public, criminal defendants, or judges

- Records regarding the acquisition of wi-fi interception devices, including invoices, purchases orders, contracts, loan agreements, procurement documents (but not limited to solicitation documents or notices of proposed contracts, proposed bids, unsolicited proposals, and/or documents justifying contracting without full and open competition), correspondence with companies providing the devices (including, but not limited to Rayzone Group, Wintego, and Magen 100), and similar documents.

- All applications submitted to state or federal courts for search warrants or orders authorizing use of wi-fi interception devices in criminal investigations, as well as any affidavits or other documents filed in support thereof, warrants or orders, denials of warrant or orders, and returns of warrants associated with those applications. If any responsive records are sealed, please provide a record containing the date and docket number for each sealed document.

- Records reflecting the docket numbers, or, if unavailable, other identifying information, of all criminal cases in which law enforcement officers sought permission to use, were authorized to use, or in fact used a wi-fi interception device as part of the underlying investigation.

- Records reflecting the number of investigations in which wi-fi interception devices have been used, and the number of those investigations that have resulted in prosecutions.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 5 business days, as the statute requires.


Derek Mitch

From: New York City Police Department

An acknowledgement letter, stating the request is being processed.

From: New York City Police Department

A no responsive documents response.