The ACLU of Michigan is concerned that the police are disproportionately targeting people of color with their twenty-first century, high-tech handhelds. Studies suggest that blacks and Latinos could bear the brunt of police abuse of these extraction devices. For one, African-Americans, who are less likely to own a landline, talk and text more on cell phones than any other group. According to a study conducted last year by Nielsen, blacks talk an average of 1331 minutes a month, over twice as much as whites (647 minutes). Latinos talk 826 minutes, and Asians 692 minutes a month. Meanwhile, blacks lead the field in texting, with 780 text messages per month. Latinos are not far behind with 767 texts, followed by 566 for whites and 384 for Asians.
Then there is the issue of racial profiling. Data provided by the state of Michigan show that the state police have a history of disproportionately conducting searches, issuing citations and giving verbal warnings to black and Latino men. Further, advocacy groups claim that racial profiling is on the rise in Southeast Michigan, arguing that since 9/11, law enforcement has increasingly targeted immigrant groups such as Arabs, Muslims and South Asians.
Similarly, racial profiling is a nationwide issue. According to Amnesty International, 32 million people in the U.S. -- the equivalent of the population of Canada--have been victims of racial profiling, and 87 million are at risk of being subjected to the practice in their lifetime. Typically, while white officers target black and Latino drivers for potential drug courier activity, drugs are more often found when police officers search whites. In Los Angeles in recent years, African-Americans and Latinos faced more police stops, frisks, searches and arrests than whites, although people of color were less likely to have a weapon.
Cell phone hacking, for cops only
Called UFED for Universal Forensic Extraction Device, this device lets police officers and other law-enforcement personnel snoop into a cellphone to very quickly (in minutes) extract key information like messages, contacts, photos, call history etc… It also gets deleted files or hidden files that could contain interesting information.The manufacturer even says that the next version will bypass the simple password of Android and iOS as if it wasn’t there. That’s not it: the UFED can also extract information from personal navigation devices which might contain logs and other information that could be contextually relevant in an investigation.
Now, we wonder in which conditions the UFED can be used, and if it requires a warrant, and you can guess that this is fairly unclear from the manufacturer’s website. After all, they’re not really the ones using it on the streets, and they ship the product to international markets where laws are different.
As it is the case with most technology, the UFED can be a formidable tool to fight criminals as they become ever more “high-tech”. Obviously, it could also lead to quick and easy abuse, but in the end, this is not a new situation and it will probably take some time and a few scandals before the dust settles. How do you think this should be used? Source