Cell Site Simulator use by San Francisco Police Department

Patrick O'Doherty filed this request with the San Francisco Police Department of San Francisco, CA.

It is a clone of this request.

Est. Completion None
Status
Fix Required

Communications

From: Patrick O'Doherty

To Whom It May Concern:

## 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"), San Francisco County Sheriff's Department, 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

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 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 calendar days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Patrick O'Doherty

From: Manfredi, Carlos (POL)

​​Patrick,

I am writing to acknowledge your request for Police Department public records, received at the Media Relations Unit via e-mail on June 11, 2015. I will respond to your request within not more than 10 calendar days, or by Saturday, June 20, 2015. See California Government Code Section 6253(c)."

Officer Carlos Manfredi #4193
Public Information Officer
San Francisco Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
Media Relations Unit

POLICE HEADQUARTERS
1245 3rd Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94158
415.837.7395 Main

415.837.7195 Desk

415.575.6083 Fax
http://sanfranciscopolice.org/

Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/OfficerManfredi<http://twitter.com/sfvas>
This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify me by email (carlos.m.manfredi@sfgov.org) and then delete the email and any copies of it.

From: Manfredi, Carlos (POL)

​​Dear Mr. Patrick O'Doherty:

The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) received your Public Records Act request dated June 11, 2015. The SFPD has completed a thorough search and responds as follows:

1. You requested “

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"), San Francisco County Sheriff's Department, 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

.” Pursuant to the California Public Records Act § 6250 ("CPRA").

The Department is invoking an extension of time to respond, due to the need to search for, collect and appropriately examine a voluminous amount of records. See CA Govt Code Section 6253(c). The Department will respond within not more than 14 calendar days, or by Thursday, July 2, 2015

Officer Carlos Manfredi #4193
Public Information Officer
San Francisco Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
Media Relations Unit

POLICE HEADQUARTERS
1245 3rd Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94158
415.837.7395 Main

415.837.7195 Desk

415.575.6083 Fax
http://sanfranciscopolice.org/

Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/OfficerManfredi<http://twitter.com/sfvas>
This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify me by email (carlos.m.manfredi@sfgov.org) and then delete the email and any copies of it.

From: Manfredi, Carlos (POL)

VIA EMAIL

Patrick O'Doherty

MuckRock News

DEPT MR 18573

PO Box 55819

Boston, MA 02205-5819

Re: Public Records Act request, dated June 11, 2015

Dear Mr. O’Doherty:

The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) is following up on your California Public Records Act request dated June 11, 2015 seeking “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"), San Francisco County Sheriff's Department, 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.”

On July 24, 2015, SFPD provided documents in response to your Public Records Act request.

We are now supplementing that production with additional information. Attached please find documents that are responsive to your request. Please note that redactions have been made and records have been withheld based on: California Government Code Section 6254(f) which exempts from disclosure records of complaints to, investigations conducted by, intelligence information or security procedures of, and investigatory or security files compiled by local police agencies; Government Code Sec. 6254(c) and Article I, sec. 1 of the California Constitution incorporated into the California Public Records Act by Government Code Sec. 6254 (k) because disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy; California Penal Code Section 832.7, which broadly protects the confidentiality of peace officer or custodial officer personnel records; Government Code Section 6254(k) which pertains to records "the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege.” The relevant state and federal laws include, but are not limited to: Evidence Code Section 1040 (official information privilege); the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (California Civil Code Section 3426 et seq), Evidence Code Section 1060 (trade secret); 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), (b)(6), (b)(7)(c) and (b)(7)(e); 6 U.S.C. sec.482(e) and (f)(1); 22 C.F.R. Parts 120-130; 22 C.F.R. 121.1, XI, (b); 22 U.S.C. sec. 2778; 26 USC 6103; and Executive Order 13637.

Officer Carlos Manfredi #4193
Public Information Officer
San Francisco Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
Media Relations Unit

POLICE HEADQUARTERS
1245 3rd Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94158
415.837.7395 Main

415.837.7195 Desk

415.575.6083 Fax
http://sanfranciscopolice.org/

Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/OfficerManfredi<http://twitter.com/sfvas>
This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify me by email (carlos.m.manfredi@sfgov.org) and then delete the email and any copies of it.

From: Patrick O'Doherty

To whom it may concern,

Supplementary to my original request I request information relating to
the following subjects:

Under what circumstances are cell site stimulator devices deployed, by
what units of the SFPD, for what category of investigations?

The number of such devices in used by the SFPD

What oversight exists for the use of such devices by SFPD?

What cases of abuse have been reported, if any?

What occasions SFPD has shared data with local prosecutors and/or
federal authorities, and what data was shared?

The data retention policies for evidence gathered through the use of
such devices

Occasions and frequencies of "tower dumps" performed for the benefit of
SFPD, and how much was paid for such services?


As stated in my original request, all requested documents will be made
available to the general public, and this request is not being made for
commercial purposes. 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 this request.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

Patrick O'Doherty

From: Andraychak, Michael (POL)

The Media Relations Unit is closed for the Independence Day Holiday.

From: Manfredi, Carlos (POL)

I have already provided you all the documents that we have on this. We are not required to create new documents. The PRA request has been completed.

Thank You

Officer Carlos Manfredi #4193
Public Information Officer
San Francisco Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
Media Relations Unit

POLICE HEADQUARTERS
1245 3rd Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94158
415.837.7395 Main

415.837.7195 Desk

415.575.6083 Fax
http://sanfranciscopolice.org/

Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/OfficerManfredi<http://twitter.com/sfvas>
This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify me by email (carlos.m.manfredi@sfgov.org) and then delete the email and any copies of it.

Files

pages

Close