Cell Simulator use by San Diego County Sheriff's Department

Franklin Antonio filed this request with the San Diego Police Department of San Diego County, CA.
Est. Completion None
Status
No Responsive Documents

Communications

From: Franklin Antonio

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I hereby request the following records:

## Background ##

Cell site simulators, also known as IMSI catchers, IMEI catchers, GSM interceptors, covert cellular tracking equipment, and digital analyzers, impersonate a wireless service provider's (i.e., mobile phone company's or cellular phone company's) cell tower, prompting mobile phones and other wireless devices to communicate with the simulators instead of with the real cell towers. These devices are often called "Stingrays," the name of one such device produced by Harris Corporation, along with their AmberJack, BlackFin, KingFish, Gossamer, LoggerHead, and TriggerFish devices.

Cell site simulators are commonly used in several ways: to collect unique numeric identifiers associated with each mobile phone in a given geographic area, to determine the precise location of a mobile phone when numbers associated with it are known but only a rough idea of its location is known, or to intercept phone calls and SMS messages.

Each of these uses raises privacy concerns, the most obvious of which is presented by the interception of voice and SMS messages. Collecting unique identifiers of all phones in a particular area inevitably collects location data on many innocent people who are suspected of no crime. Determination of the precise location of a specific phone can reveal that the phone, and thus the person who operates it, is in a constitutionally-protected place, such as a home, that has traditionally been immune from search without judicial approval via search warrant. The locations of people's mobile phones reveal a variety of personal information, such as: with whom they associate, where they assemble, where they spend their days, where they spend their nights, when they are home alone, where they protest, where they worship, and health care providers they visit.

It has been widely reported in recent months that law enforcement agencies use these devices while hiding their use from the public and from the courts.

Despite widespread public interest in the use and misuse of cell site simulators, the public lack information about your agency's use of these devices or about your agency's policy for such use. Information is needed so the public can determine whether use of cell site simulators by your agency complies with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and with California law.

## Request ##

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I request:

1. Records regarding your agency's acquisition of cell site simulators, including but not limited to invoices, purchase orders, contracts, loan agreements, evaluation agreements, solicitation letters, correspondence with companies and public agencies that provide the devices, and similar documents.

2. Records regarding any offer, proposal, arrangement, agreement, or memorandum of understanding with California Highway Patrol ("CHP"), Naval Criminal Investigative Service ("NCICS"), Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), U.S. Marshals Service, FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit ("DITU"), or any governmental agency, or any corporation, to borrow, permanently acquire from, or use any cell site simulator.

3. All nondisclosure agreements with Harris Corporation, Digital Receiver Technology (DRT, formerly Utica Systems, now a subsidiary of Boeing Corporation), Septier Communication Limited, Proximus LLC, any other corporation, and any state or federal agencies, regarding your agency's actual or potential possession or use of cell site simulators

4. Records regarding policies and guidelines governing use of cell site simulators, including but not limited to 1) when, where, how, and against whom they devices may be used, 2) logging, retention, purging, use, and auditing data stored in or communicated from the devices, 3) under what circumstances administrative warrant, judicial warrant, or other legal process must, should, or should not be obtained prior to, during, or following direct or indirect use of the devices, 4) under what circumstances the existence or use of the devices must, should, or should not be revealed to judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, criminal defendants, or the general public., and 5) parallel construction techniques for use in avoidance of disclosure of the initial method of discovery of information gained initially by use of cell site simulators

5. Training materials for use of cell site simulators

6. Records regarding any communications or agreements with wireless service providers (i.e., mobile phone carriers such as AT&T, CenturyLink, CREDO Mobile, MetroPCS, Sprint, Ting, T-Mobile, Verizon, Virgin Mobile, etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators

7. Records regarding any communications, licenses, waivers, or agreements, with federal or state communications regulatory agencies (e.g., Federal Communications Commission, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, California Public Utilities Commission, Idaho Public Utilities Commission, Oregon Public Utility Commission, etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators

8. Records reflecting the number of investigations in which cell site simulators were used, the number of those investigations that resulted in prosecutions, and the number of those investigations that resulted in convictions

9. Records reflecting a list of all criminal cases, with docket numbers if available, in which law enforcement officers or other staff used or arranged for the use of one or more cell site simulators as part of the underlying investigations

10. All applications submitted to state or federal courts for warrants, orders, or other other authorization for use of cell site simulators in criminal investigations, as well as any warrants, orders, authorizations, denials of warrants, denials of orders, denials of authorization, and returns of warrants associated with those applications

11. Records regarding the use of cell site simulators in closed investigations

12. Date and docket number of any responsive records that are sealed

13. All associated metadata

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, 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 10 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Franklin Antonio

From: Toyen, Sanford

Sir-

The below email is how your Public Records Act request was received by this office. As you can see it is extremely difficult, if not impossible to read. Given that you have asked for 13 discrete categories of documents, I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that you use proper punctuation, spacing, and formatting to make it so that someone tasked with responding to your request can read and process it.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM D. GORE, Sheriff

By: Sanford A. Toyen, Legal Advisor
Office of the Sheriff, Legal Affairs Unit

"Keeping the Peace Since 1850"

From: MuckRock

Hello Sheriff Gore,

I apologize for the confusion regarding this request. The formatting was altered in the sending process. Please let me know if this version is also illegible.

Thank you very much for your help.

___________________

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I hereby request the following records:

## Background ##

Cell site simulators, also known as IMSI catchers, IMEI catchers, GSM interceptors, covert cellular tracking equipment, and digital analyzers, impersonate a wireless service provider's (i.e., mobile phone company's or cellular phone company's) cell tower, prompting mobile phones and other wireless devices to communicate with the simulators instead of with the real cell towers. These devices are often called "Stingrays," the name of one such device produced by Harris Corporation, along with their AmberJack, BlackFin, KingFish, Gossamer, LoggerHead, and TriggerFish devices.

Cell site simulators are commonly used in several ways: to collect unique numeric identifiers associated with each mobile phone in a given geographic area, to determine the precise location of a mobile phone when numbers associated with it are known but only a rough idea of its location is known, or to intercept phone calls and SMS messages.

Each of these uses raises privacy concerns, the most obvious of which is presented by the interception of voice and SMS messages. Collecting unique identifiers of all phones in a particular area inevitably collects location data on many innocent people who are suspected of no crime. Determination of the precise location of a specific phone can reveal that the phone, and thus the person who operates it, is in a constitutionally-protected place, such as a home, that has traditionally been immune from search without judicial approval via search warrant. The locations of people's mobile phones reveal a variety of personal information, such as: with whom they associate, where they assemble, where they spend their days, where they spend their nights, when they are home alone, where they protest, where they worship, and health care providers they visit.

It has been widely reported in recent months that law enforcement agencies use these devices while hiding their use from the public and from the courts.

Despite widespread public interest in the use and misuse of cell site simulators, the public lack information about your agency's use of these devices or about your agency's policy for such use. Information is needed so the public can determine whether use of cell site simulators by your agency complies with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and with California law.

## Request ##

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I request:

1. Records regarding your agency's acquisition of cell site simulators, including but not limited to invoices, purchase orders, contracts, loan agreements, evaluation agreements, solicitation letters, correspondence with companies and public agencies that provide the devices, and similar documents.

2. Records regarding any offer, proposal, arrangement, agreement, or memorandum of understanding with California Highway Patrol ("CHP"), Naval Criminal Investigative Service ("NCICS"), Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), U.S. Marshals Service, FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit ("DITU"), or any governmental agency, or any corporation, to borrow, permanently acquire from, or use any cell site simulator.

3. All nondisclosure agreements with Harris Corporation, Digital Receiver Technology (DRT, formerly Utica Systems, now a subsidiary of Boeing Corporation), Septier Communication Limited, Proximus LLC, any other corporation, and any state or federal agencies, regarding your agency's actual or potential possession or use of cell site simulators

4. Records regarding policies and guidelines governing use of cell site simulators, including but not limited to 1) when, where, how, and against whom they devices may be used, 2) logging, retention, purging, use, and auditing data stored in or communicated from the devices, 3) under what circumstances administrative warrant, judicial warrant, or other legal process must, should, or should not be obtained prior to, during, or following direct or indirect use of the devices, 4) under what circumstances the existence or use of the devices must, should, or should not be revealed to judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, criminal defendants, or the general public., and 5) parallel construction techniques for use in avoidance of disclosure of the initial method of discovery of information gained initially by use of cell site simulators

5. Training materials for use of cell site simulators

6. Records regarding any communications or agreements with wireless service providers (i.e., mobile phone carriers such as AT&T, CenturyLink, CREDO Mobile, MetroPCS, Sprint, Ting, T-Mobile, Verizon, Virgin Mobile, etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators

7. Records regarding any communications, licenses, waivers, or agreements, with federal or state communications regulatory agencies (e.g., Federal Communications Commission, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, California Public Utilities Commission, Idaho Public Utilities Commission, Oregon Public Utility Commission, etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators

8. Records reflecting the number of investigations in which cell site simulators were used, the number of those investigations that resulted in prosecutions, and the number of those investigations that resulted in convictions

9. Records reflecting a list of all criminal cases, with docket numbers if available, in which law enforcement officers or other staff used or arranged for the use of one or more cell site simulators as part of the underlying investigations

10. All applications submitted to state or federal courts for warrants, orders, or other other authorization for use of cell site simulators in criminal investigations, as well as any warrants, orders, authorizations, denials of warrants, denials of orders, denials of authorization, and returns of warrants associated with those applications

11. Records regarding the use of cell site simulators in closed investigations

12. Date and docket number of any responsive records that are sealed

13. All associated metadata

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, 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 10 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Franklin Antonio

From: Toyen, Sanford

Yes. Same problem.

Also, it's going to me, Sanford Toyen, not Sheriff Gore. That's fine, I'm the appropriate person to be handling it.

Perhaps you could type out the request, scan it in PDF format, and email me the PDF file?

Sincerely,

WILLIAM D. GORE, Sheriff

By: Sanford A. Toyen, Legal Advisor
Office of the Sheriff, Legal Affairs Unit

"Keeping the Peace Since 1850"

From: MuckRock

Hello Mr. Toyen,

I've attached it again as a .pdf. I hope it comes through more clearly now.

Thank you!

From: Toyen, Sanford

Got it! Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM D. GORE, Sheriff

By: Sanford A. Toyen, Legal Advisor
Office of the Sheriff, Legal Affairs Unit

"Keeping the Peace Since 1850"

From: Toyen, Sanford

Dear Mr. Antonio-

The Sheriff's Department has no records in response to your request. While the Sheriff's Department has memoranda of agreement with many of the law enforcement agencies referenced in your letter, none of the agreements relate to cell site simulators.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM D. GORE, Sheriff

By: Sanford A. Toyen, Legal Advisor

Office of the Sheriff, Legal Affairs Unit

"Keeping the Peace Since 1850"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I hereby request the following records:

## Background ##

Cell site simulators, also known as IMSI catchers, IMEI catchers, GSM interceptors, covert cellular tracking

equipment, and digital analyzers, impersonate a wireless service provider's (i.e., mobile phone company's or cellular

phone company's) cell tower, prompting mobile phones and other wireless devices to communicate with the

simulators instead of with the real cell towers. These devices are often called "Stingrays," the name of one such

device produced by Harris Corporation, along with their AmberJack, BlackFin, KingFish, Gossamer, LoggerHead,

and TriggerFish devices.

Cell site simulators are commonly used in several ways: to collect unique numeric identifiers associated with each

mobile phone in a given geographic area, to determine the precise location of a mobile phone when numbers

associated with it are known but only a rough idea of its location is known, or to intercept phone calls and SMS

messages.

Each of these uses raises privacy concerns, the most obvious of which is presented by the interception of voice and

SMS messages. Collecting unique identifiers of all phones in a particular area inevitably collects location data on

many innocent people who are suspected of no crime. Determination of the precise location of a specific phone can

reveal that the phone, and thus the person who operates it, is in a constitutionally-protected place, such as a home,

that has traditionally been immune from search without judicial approval via search warrant. The locations of

people's mobile phones reveal a variety of personal information, such as: with whom they associate, where they

assemble, where they spend their days, where they spend their nights, when they are home alone, where they protest,

where they worship, and health care providers they visit.

It has been widely reported in recent months that law enforcement agencies use these devices while hiding their use

from the public and from the courts.

Despite widespread public interest in the use and misuse of cell site simulators, the public lack information about

your agency's use of these devices or about your agency's policy for such use. Information is needed so the public

can determine whether use of cell site simulators by your agency complies with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution and with California law.

## Request ##

Pursuant to California's Sunshine Amendment (Cal. Const. Art. I, § 3(b)), I request:

1. Records regarding your agency's acquisition of cell site simulators, including but not limited to invoices, purchase

orders, contracts, loan agreements, evaluation agreements, solicitation letters, correspondence with companies and

public agencies that provide the devices, and similar documents.

2. Records regarding any offer, proposal, arrangement, agreement, or memorandum of understanding with California

Highway Patrol ("CHP"), Naval Criminal Investigative Service ("NCICS"), Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"),

U.S. Marshals Service, FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit ("DITU"), or any governmental agency, or any

corporation, to borrow, permanently acquire from, or use any cell site simulator.

3. All nondisclosure agreements with Harris Corporation, Digital Receiver Technology (DRT, formerly Utica

Systems, now a subsidiary of Boeing Corporation), Septier Communication Limited, Proximus LLC, any other

corporation, and any state or federal agencies, regarding your agency's actual or potential possession or use of cell

site simulators

4. Records regarding policies and guidelines governing use of cell site simulators, including but not limited to

1) when, where, how, and against whom they devices may be used,

2) logging, retention, purging, use, and auditing data stored in or communicated from the devices,

3) under what circumstances administrative warrant, judicial warrant, or other legal process must, should, or should

not be obtained prior to, during, or following direct or indirect use of the devices,

4) under what circumstances the existence or use of the devices must, should, or should not be revealed to judges,

prosecutors, defense attorneys, criminal defendants, or the general public., and

5) parallel construction techniques for use in avoidance of disclosure of the initial method of discovery of

information gained initially by use of cell site simulators

5. Training materials for use of cell site simulators

6. Records regarding any communications or agreements with wireless service providers (i.e., mobile phone carriers

such as AT&T, CenturyLink, CREDO Mobile, MetroPCS, Sprint, Ting, T-Mobile, Verizon, Virgin Mobile, etc.)

concerning use of cell site simulators

7. Records regarding any communications, licenses, waivers, or agreements, with federal or state communications

regulatory agencies (e.g., Federal Communications Commission, Canadian Radio-television and

Telecommunications Commission, California Public Utilities Commission, Idaho Public Utilities Commission,

Oregon Public Utility Commission, etc.) concerning use of cell site simulators

8. Records reflecting the number of investigations in which cell site simulators were used, the number of those

investigations that resulted in prosecutions, and the number of those investigations that resulted in convictions

9. Records reflecting a list of all criminal cases, with docket numbers if available, in which law enforcement officers

or other staff used or arranged for the use of one or more cell site simulators as part of the underlying investigations

10. All applications submitted to state or federal courts for warrants, orders, or other other authorization for use of

cell site simulators in criminal investigations, as well as any warrants, orders, authorizations, denials of warrants,

denials of orders, denials of authorization, and returns of warrants associated with those applications

11. Records regarding the use of cell site simulators in closed investigations

12. Date and docket number of any responsive records that are sealed

13. All associated metadata

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested

documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at

MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering

and not for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, 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 CDROM

if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to

this request within 10 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Franklin Antonio

Files

There are no files associated with this request.