Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Privacy Crime Security

Re-Victimization From Police-Auctioned Cell Phones (krebsonsecurity.com) 31

An anonymous reader quotes a report from KrebsOnSecurity: Countless smartphones seized in arrests and searches by police forces across the United States are being auctioned online without first having the data on them erased, a practice that can lead to crime victims being re-victimized, a new study found (PDF). In response, the largest online marketplace for items seized in U.S. law enforcement investigations says it now ensures that all phones sold through its platform will be data-wiped prior to auction.

Researchers at the University of Maryland last year purchased 228 smartphones sold "as-is" from PropertyRoom.com, which bills itself as the largest auction house for police departments in the United States. Of phones they won at auction (at an average of $18 per phone), the researchers found 49 had no PIN or passcode; they were able to guess an additional 11 of the PINs by using the top-40 most popular PIN or swipe patterns. Phones may end up in police custody for any number of reasons -- such as its owner was involved in identity theft -- and in these cases the phone itself was used as a tool to commit the crime. "We initially expected that police would never auction these phones, as they would enable the buyer to recommit the same crimes as the previous owner," the researchers explained in a paper released this month. "Unfortunately, that expectation has proven false in practice."

Beyond what you would expect from unwiped second hand phones -- every text message, picture, email, browser history, location history, etc. -- the 61 phones they were able to access also contained significant amounts of data pertaining to crime -- including victims' data -- the researchers found. [...] Also, the researchers found that many of the phones clearly had personal information on them regarding previous or intended targets of crime: A dozen of the phones had photographs of government-issued IDs. Three of those were on phones that apparently belonged to sex workers; their phones contained communications with clients.
"We informed [PropertyRoom] of our research in October 2022, and they responded that they would review our findings internally," said Dave Levin, an assistant professor of computer science at University of Maryland. "They stopped selling them for a while, but then it slowly came back, and then we made sure we won every auction. And all of the ones we got from that were indeed wiped, except there were four devices that had external SD [storage] cards in them that weren't wiped."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Re-Victimization From Police-Auctioned Cell Phones

Comments Filter:
  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @09:01PM (#63527257)

    Countless smartphones seized in arrests and searches by police forces across the United States are being auctioned online without first having the data on them erased.

    The one time the Police are *suppose* to destroy evidence ... /snark

    • Should the police be selling stolen goods? Especially when it has the victims personal information on it?

      Government sanctioned shakedown and fence operation called the Police.

      • by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Wednesday May 17, 2023 @01:01AM (#63527603) Homepage Journal

        Should the police be selling stolen goods? Especially when it has the victims personal information on it?

        Government sanctioned shakedown and fence operation called the Police.

        Nothing that was stolen is legally the property of the police or the government. These goods legally belong to the people that they were stolen from, and must (by law) be returned to them if it is possible to determine their rightful owner.

        If this is actually happening, the victims have an airtight case against the relevant police department for at least a dozen different civil and criminal offenses. The police would be guilty of dealing in stolen goods, which is a felony, and anyone buying those goods from the police would be guilty of at least a misdemeanor. They could also be held civilly liable for any lost data that was on the phone which otherwise would have been recoverable by the original owner, and that could also potentially constitute larceny, depending on whether that lost data has any monetary value. Add to that various violations of laws related to failing to properly report found property, various laws with "conspiracy" in the name, etc. The further injury from victims' personal information being stolen is just the icing on the cake.

        If police are doing this, lock them up. This isn't a grey area. They're breaking the law, and because they are members of law enforcement, they should be penalized to the maximum extent of the law for violating the public trust.

        • Internet lawyers are adorable.
          • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

            Bootlicker apologists for asset forfeiture, which steals more money from Americans than robbery, are atrocious authoritarians.

            • Could you please reproduce the hallucinated message to which you believed you were responding, so that we can all have some context for this?
        • Do yourself a favour and lookup "Qualified immunity" and "Civil forfeiture". What you write might be true in the rest of the world, but the US is a special place.
          • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            Civil forfeiture applies only to property used in committing a crime, and does not negate an individual's legal obligation to return stolen goods to their rightful owner once it is discovered that they were stolen, nor an individual's obligation to do due diligence if a reasonable person would suspect that something was stolen.

            Qualified immunity doesn't protect the government itself from prosecution and does not apply except in situations where whether a law applies is unclear. It does not apply when poli

            • Wikipedia:

              In the United States, civil forfeiture (also called civil asset forfeiture or civil judicial forfeiture), is a process in which law enforcement officers take assets from people who are suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.

              To get back the seized property, owners must prove it was not involved in criminal activity.

              Sounds to me that they basically can take what they want and then you have the burden of proof to prove that you are innocent, something that can be quite hard to do.

        • by Bob_Who ( 926234 )
          When Pigs Fly.
      • Government sanctioned shakedown and fence operation called the Police.

        Fun Fact: That was the band's original name, but Sting thought it was too wordy. :-)

      • hint in sig below.

        The phones where criminals phones that had information about victims being targeted. Some belonged to sex workers (Why are these being sold and not returned?!), And I'd say theres a decent case some are asset forfeiture smash and grabs from the "Hey your black, we're taking your stuff until you can prove you arent a pot smoker somehow" school of police revenue raising.

        • If you become a victim, you are okay with the police selling your personal information to the highest bidder? And you support civil forfeiture?

          I read the article, it is not a paper (read your own sig). I do not support law enforcement here.

  • by iAmWaySmarterThanYou ( 10095012 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @09:35PM (#63527299)

    If they wipe the phones then it will damage by online business, realphonepics.xxx

  • by znrt ( 2424692 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @09:38PM (#63527303)

    i guess this has to do with that infamous "forfeitures" mechanism that allows us cops to confiscate people's property on mere suspicion. i heard they do keep the money or resell any stuff routinely, it's part of their budget. so i guess these "evidences" got bunched up with all the other stuff, the concept of "keeping custody" disappeared if there ever was one, and why should they give a fuck about the privacy of the people ... they just robbed!

    to protect and to serve, the us is such a weird place ...

    • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

      so i guess these "evidences" got bunched up with all the other stuff

      The term you're looking for is "criminal negligence".

      Every state in the U.S. has an office whose job it is to handle lost property. Police have a legal duty to return lost property to that office, same as if you or I found a lost cell phone. If they are not only failing to do that, but further profiting from that failure, that's profiteering, and is criminal at multiple levels.

  • by LeeLynx ( 6219816 ) on Wednesday May 17, 2023 @02:07AM (#63527641)
    Let me explain this slowly.

    Dick is an identity thief.

    Dick has victims' information on his phone.

    Dick gets caught.

    Dick's phone is taken away because he used it in a crime.

    Dick's phone is sold to Jane.

    Jane finds the victim data on Dick's phone.

    Jane can now steal identities.

    Do any of the above posters need this explained further? Do I need to use smaller words?
    • by Bob_Who ( 926234 )
      Is Dick a dick? Does Jane like dick? In a fight, will Jane lick Dick? What about the balls? I can read, I just hate faux junk in a box. Are the gonads as advertised, or are they ornamental. I don't mean Asian.
  • Back in the early 2000's, some "network security" guy buys a bunch of used copiers from some wholesale outfit. Various models from multiple manufacturers. Some had stored documents on the hard drives. Bank statements, medical histories, police reports and what not. The entire copier industry went nuts overboard to amp up security. Now, most of the machines that have HDD's, SSD's or NVME's have "wipe" technology that if the drive is pulled and attached to anything else, it will not be accessable. Not to m

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...