Boone County Sheriff's Department to receive new investigative device
Tuesday, January 12, 2010 | 6:06 p.m. CST
The Universal Forensics Extraction Device, or UFED, is manufactured by CelleBrite, a leading company in the transfer and backup of mobile content. The Mid-Missouri Internet Crimes Task Force will use the device to copy cell phone data that might be useful in its investigations. ¦ Photo courtesy of CelleBrite BY Jonathan Stephanoff
COLUMBIA — The ability to peer deep into cellular phones and other mobile devices soon will become part of the Boone County Sheriff's Department investigatory arsenal.
The department will spend $3,999 on a gizmo that carries an extravagant name. The Universal Forensics Extraction Device, or UFED, is manufactured by CelleBrite, a leading company in the transfer and backup of mobile content. It also sells UFEDs to law enforcement agencies worldwide, according to CelleBrite's Web site.
The Boone County Commission approved the purchase Tuesday morning. The Mid-Missouri Internet Crimes Task Force will use the device to copy cell phone data — including phone numbers, contacts, pictures, videos, text messages, call logs and even some information the phone owner thinks has been deleted — that might be useful in its investigations.
The UFED is a "known device in forensics investigation tools," Detective Tracy Perkins of the task force said.
The Mid-Missouri Internet Crimes Task Force focuses much of its resources on child exploitation, serving Boone and the seven surrounding counties. Perkins said the device will be used by the task force lab in a wide variety of investigations.
Having their own UFED will "save a lot of time and travel for the officers involved," Perkins said. Until now, the task force has had to travel elsewhere to borrow another agency's UFED.
The ability to extract data from mobile devices raises some privacy concerns.
"Cell phone privacy issues all depend on the case," Perkins said. With written permission of the user, investigators can access the phone; without it, they would have to get permission from the courts.
The UFED is about the size of a desk phone. Operating as a stand-alone unit or tethered to a computer, the device comes with a host of cables to plug into nearly 2,000 mobile devices, or 95 percent of all marketed cell phones, according to CelleBrite's Web site.
The purchase is part of requirements for the Multi-Jurisdiction Cyber Crime Grant, which provides federal money through the Missouri Department of Public Safety, according to the county purchase request.
Since cell phones are really radios, why would anyone expect privacy?
Exactly!
Quote from: Diane Amberg on January 17, 2010, 09:43:36 AM
Since cell phones are really radios, why would anyone expect privacy?
There is a big difference between broadcasting over a frequency and the Government coming into your phone when it is turned off and activating it to retrieve your data. Big big difference.
What about your computer? Do you think its ok if the Govt from a remote location comes in and turns on your puter and retrieves your personal data? Did you know they can do that? :O you didn't know????
LOL yep they can.
How many of you have digital cable i your home? OR dishnet or direct tv? Did you know that the settop boxes h ave microphones and cameras in them and can be turned on from remote location?
But to answer your question about radio, cells are still phone service. IF you by chance are talking and a signal is picked up then yeah you can't expect it to not be monitored. Thats why if you want to talk on cell you need to encrypt your phone conversations.
The data stored on your phone though falls under private papers and 4th amendment of being secure in your property and private papers.
Yep, we knew that!
It would only be an issue if you were doing something you weren't suppose to be doing in the first place. Developing new forms of bomb material made out of undectable natural materials would probally not get to the FBI with out Google.
I am so with you on that one!
If the Gov't wants to spy on my now boring, ordinary life, let 'em.They'd fall asleep. Now Varmit, that's something else. So for whomever is watching, that's V-A-R-M-I-T, spelled without the "n."Yuk,Yuk. ;D
Quote from: ADP on January 17, 2010, 12:43:44 PM
It would only be an issue if you were doing something you weren't suppose to be doing in the first place. Developing new forms of bomb material made out of undectable natural materials would probally not get to the FBI with out Google.
Its an issue even if i am not doing anything. The government has no right to search anything of mine without a warrant. Period.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on January 17, 2010, 01:33:44 PM
If the Gov't wants to spy on my now boring, ordinary life, let 'em.They'd fall asleep. Now Varmit, that's something else. So for whomever is watching, that's V-A-R-M-I-T, spelled without the "n."Yuk,Yuk. ;D
There in lies the problem. You aren't concerned enough about the constitution to hold them accountable for the illegal searching. They are in violation of the law and you don't care.
I don't care because I am not doing anything that I am ashamed of. And if you are so concerned about someone discovering what you are doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing it. Just because it can be done doesn't mean that it is being done. Besides if the government can do it, you can darned well be assured that the less than honorable factions are doing it also. Maybe you should just go hibernate somewhere and cut off all communication as there is no privacy anymore. Besides, whatever they find can't be used in court unless they have a warrant.
"I'm not doing anything illegal so it doesn't matter that the police are breaking the law"...that is sad. How can you say something like that and then turn around and claim that you support our military? Men have died to defend our country and our constitution yet you don't care. Nothing but sheep...
Quote from: Wilma on January 17, 2010, 03:16:43 PM
I don't care because I am not doing anything that I am ashamed of. And if you are so concerned about someone discovering what you are doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing it. Just because it can be done doesn't mean that it is being done. Besides if the government can do it, you can darned well be assured that the less than honorable factions are doing it also. Maybe you should just go hibernate somewhere and cut off all communication as there is no privacy anymore. Besides, whatever they find can't be used in court unless they have a warrant.
That is plain sad that you don't care that the Government is violating the law. No wonder our country is going to hell. If the people don't care what the government does, then we are all screwed.
And just who put the people in the government. WE did. How can we blame the government for something that we helped it do? Can we change it? Sure we can. But it has to be done legally or we will be as bad as we claim they are. So where does that leave us. Sitting here bitching about what is being done or preparing to do something about it as soon as it can legally be done? Bitching is easier, isn't it?
I don't think if we did whatever we could do.. they still are going to do whatever they do.. Once a crook ..always a crook..
I agree.. I'm not doing anything wrong ( in my eyes) but it isn't anyone damned business what I am doing.. and they don't have any right to monitor anything I do unless they have very good probable cause..
The end.. lol
Quote from: Wilma on January 17, 2010, 05:56:40 PM
And just who put the people in the government. WE did. How can we blame the government for something that we helped it do? Can we change it? Sure we can. But it has to be done legally or we will be as bad as we claim they are. So where does that leave us. Sitting here bitching about what is being done or preparing to do something about it as soon as it can legally be done? Bitching is easier, isn't it?
Well no i didn't put these criminals in office. But it doesn't relieve me of the responsibility of holding them accountable for violating the law. Writing is one step. VOting is another and if that doesn't work, replacing them by impeachment and if that doeesn't work, then by force.
Well get with it and let me know how it works out for you.
Using a cell phone is kind of like standing out in the yard, yelling at your neighbor across the street. Who ever happens by, either accidentally or on purpose can be an eavesdropper. Not your intention you say; sometimes we must be a little more careful when we want to be discreet. You wouldn't want to criticize the pastors' wife while sitting at a public restraunt with the town gossip in the next booth. Neither would you want to discuss plans for subversive actions on a cell phone. Some did that, and with the government security surveillance, they were caught. The government can monitor anything that I do if it helps to keep us safe. I know, I don't like the idea of somebody looking over my shoulder either. Times are changed from when the constitution was penned, and I do think that the fathers of this country did an absolutely great job! None could have seen the advances in technology, nor the developments that the world has seen in the past two hundred years.
SDM, I like the way you put that. Nothing is secret anymore and if the government needs to use the latest in technology, so be it. Somehow or other, I feel safe. Now someone is going to say, how can you feel safe when........................ I will just say, I am glad my cup is half full.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Franklin Feb 17, 1775
Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say "what should be the reward of such sacrifices?" Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!
Samuel Adams August 1 1776
Our forefathers didn't have to know about technology. Technology isn't the problem, the problem is the men who usurp their powers to use that technology. THat has not changed in 234 years. What they wrote and dreamed 234 years ago still holds today in todays time and society. The only thing that has changed is the new tools of technology that can be used to usurp authority from the people and to destroy this republic. BUT only if we allow them to. THat brings the second quote. THe reason this country is allowing the Government to do so is they prefer to trade their liberty for wealth and comfort. Those that say i've got it good, i'm doing ok, my bills are paid, i have food to eat, are selling their liberty for wealth. And as adams said you are nothing more than a slave if you do. His point was that freedom is a eternal vigil and a eternal fight to keep that very freedom.
You know i raise goats. I have had opportunity to raise sheep but i don't because goats are smarter.
When you go to shear a sheep or if a predator goes and tackles a sheep to kill it, once that sheep is on the ground on its side, it lays there and does nothing. The coyote can kill at leisure and essentially eat it alive.
When a goat is taken down, it fights. IT fights for its life from the second it realizes its in danger and runs to the second it takes its last breath. It doesn't just lay there and wait to be eaten.
the comparison is quite accurate when people are referred to as sheep. As long as they are comfortable they will lay there and be eaten alive.
Just a few things that I would like to point out...
1. The article isn't about the federal gov't using this technology, its about local law enforcement agencies using it. Now maybe its just me, but when law enforcement officers break the law, in my opinion, then there isn't any law but what we make. Not only that but given the rampant abuse of power by law enforcement agencies I don't think giving them more is a good idea.
2. If you are going to use the agrument "so long as we are kept safe I don't mind giving up freedoms" then you shouldn't be opposed to an age limit on drivers liscences. For example, no one under the age of 18 or over the age of 55 can have one, seeing as how these are the two primary groups most likely to cause accidents.
3. Who gets to decide what is "subversive"?
4. As far as "How can we blame the gov't for something we helped it to do?", thats simple. Although We the People may have put these people in office it was with an understanding that they would not only uphold the law but follow it as well.
5. As farr as ease dropping on a cell phone conversation, its kinda hard to hear both sides of the conversation without technological aid. So that argument doesn't hold water.
6. What other parts of the Constitution are you willing to shread in the name of safety?
Somehow I feel compelled to defend my government. I don't think that the government is spying on anyone without a reason. I think that any means to information that will keep us safe is all right, legal or illegal. For instance, let's take a supposition:
A billfold is found. It is turned in to the local sheriff. The sheriff opens the billfold to ascertain the owner. A note falls out and open. In picking up the note to return it to the billfold, he inadvertently reads it. It says, "I have the guns. Meet me at the school."
Now what should the sheriff do? He is in possession of information that seems to indicate that an illegal act is about to take place. Yet, he obtained this information by reading a note that was supposed to be private. Can he legally take action on the basis of this note?
If he is my sheriff, he had darned well better take action, legal or not. This is the same basis as the so-called spying on individuals. I don't care if I am spied on if by so doing some dangerous enterprise is prevented. I don't care if I am spied on because I am doing nothing illegal. I don't care if the government is using illegal means to prevent more 9-11's from happening. In the big picture the terrorists and criminals are using illegal means to carry on their projects. Why shouldn't the government, which is supposed to be protecting us, use illegal means? And how many of you would be shouting to High Heaven if the government failed to protect us?
When it comes to a choice, I will take my safety over my privacy any day.
Safety over privacy??...really? Then you don't have any objections to the new airport "naked" scanners? And using your logic, police shouldn't have to obtain search warrants, or have a parent or advocate present when questioning minors? Or better yet, strip searching minors?
Quote from: Wilma on January 18, 2010, 02:07:17 PM
Somehow I feel compelled to defend my government. I don't think that the government is spying on anyone without a reason. I think that any means to information that will keep us safe is all right, legal or illegal. For instance, let's take a supposition:
A billfold is found. It is turned in to the local sheriff. The sheriff opens the billfold to ascertain the owner. A note falls out and open. In picking up the note to return it to the billfold, he inadvertently reads it. It says, "I have the guns. Meet me at the school."
This is not even in the same ball park. the wallet scenario is not in the possession or in the persons home. IT is on a public street. A cell phone to be in use has to be in the persons possession or it cannot be used.
QuoteNow what should the sheriff do? He is in possession of information that seems to indicate that an illegal act is about to take place. Yet, he obtained this information by reading a note that was supposed to be private. Can he legally take action on the basis of this note?
Yes as it was not secured by the owner.
QuoteIf he is my sheriff, he had darned well better take action, legal or not. This is the same basis as the so-called spying on individuals.
Absolutely not. IT isn't the same thing. Like i said before, the wallet is not secured to begin with. Papers, cellphones, cellphone contents are secured and in a persons possession. What is in your possession is yours and not subject to search or seizure without a warrant.
QuoteI don't care if I am spied on if by so doing some dangerous enterprise is prevented.
I don't care if I am spied on because I am doing nothing illegal.
That isn't the point. Our forefathers secured our liberty by protecting us with the 1 -10th amendments. You know how important they are? They are SO IMPORTANT that they cannot in no shape or form or fashion be amended period. THey are untouchable by anyone.
Your saying that you don't care if they search you unwarranted, is allowing them to totally violate the rule of law and when the government violates the law, then there is no law.
QuoteI don't care if the government is using illegal means to prevent more 9-11's from happening. In the big picture the terrorists and criminals are using illegal means to carry on their projects. Why shouldn't the government, which is supposed to be protecting us, use illegal means? And how many of you would be shouting to High Heaven if the government failed to protect us?[/buote]
because its not the governments job to protect us by violating the constitution. THe police have no authority to protect citizens. Their job is only to protect public property. Sorry to burst your bubble there. the Law doen't even have to respond to your 911 call when someone breaks into your house and threatens you. Your protection is YOUR responsibility, not the police officers responsibility.
Quote
When it comes to a choice, I will take my safety over my privacy any day.
well then you are one of those that Samuel Adams spoke of, may your master be kind to you.
Am I ever glad that I am not paranoid.
I'm not so sure about paranoids but there sure are some neurotics on this site!
You'd have to count me in with the neurotics then. I agree with Steve and Varmit and Teresa. The problem with allowing law enforcement, government be they local or federal to break laws, walk on freedoms and over step bounds is that they will keep taking more and more as people allow them. How many freedoms must you lose before it matters to you? Personally, I don't do anything in my house that is illegal, but what I do is private and my conversations are private and it's the principle of the matter. This is supposed to be a free country and yet we're seeing those freedoms be trampled upon one by one and people don't care enough to do anything about it. Sort of the toad in the pot of hot water thing.
Well ya'll, wire tapping is another thing altogether. But a cell phone transmission into the atmosphere does not belong to anybody. Just as if I spoke to you and was overheard by someone else. The third person is certainly not infringing on my right to privacy. There is a lot of paranoia here.
If the cell phone transmission does not belong to anybody then why is against the law to use a "little black box" to grab the sattalite waves that are in the atmosphere ? maybe i can get HBO, Playboy Channel and a bunch more goodies for free if they don't belong to anyone.
Quote from: sixdogsmom on January 18, 2010, 06:21:01 PM
Well ya'll, wire tapping is another thing altogether. But a cell phone transmission into the atmosphere does not belong to anybody. Just as if I spoke to you and was overheard by someone else. The third person is certainly not infringing on my right to privacy. There is a lot of paranoia here.
Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.
Quote from: sixdogsmom on January 18, 2010, 06:21:01 PM
Well ya'll, wire tapping is another thing altogether. But a cell phone transmission into the atmosphere does not belong to anybody. Just as if I spoke to you and was overheard by someone else. The third person is certainly not infringing on my right to privacy. There is a lot of paranoia here.
You didn't read the article. The article wasn't about transmissions. The article was about the machine they now have that will turn on your cellphone, download all the information in the phone you have on it and they can even recover deleted data off the phone.
THey can remotely turn this on without your knowlege now and search your phone.
Quote from: jarhead on January 18, 2010, 06:30:33 PM
If the cell phone transmission does not belong to anybody then why is against the law to use a "little black box" to grab the sattalite waves that are in the atmosphere ? maybe i can get HBO, Playboy Channel and a bunch more goodies for free if they don't belong to anyone.
Jarhead i'm not talking about using a radio transmission. This device remotely turns on your phone and they access your phone through its network and searches it. It is the same thing as searching your computer at home in your house behind locked doors.
Steve, I was asking SDM, but not to worry my friend. I do not have a cell phone and do not use a cordless phone. Am I paranoid ?? You can bet your sweet bippy I am !!!! :)
I am far from paranoid. I am quite content that the Lord will see me through whatever comes my way, BUT, it does anger me. It angers me that the government does whatever it wants "for our own good" and people are fine with this because they see it as an inconvenience or they're not doing anything wrong or it doesn't directly affect them and fail to see the big picture of where all of this is headed eventually. How many freedoms and rights must be infringed upon before people care?
Quote from: jarhead on January 18, 2010, 06:42:06 PM
Steve, I was asking SDM, but not to worry my friend. I do not have a cell phone and do not use a cordless phone. Am I paranoid ?? You can bet your sweet bippy I am !!!! :)
No your reply kinda surprised me and i didn't eralize it was a question. LOL i Know you didn't waste your time becoming a marine to just lay down like some sheep.
How many does it bother that they are infringing on the rights of people who smoke?
Quote from: greatguns on January 18, 2010, 07:23:13 PM
How many does it bother that they are infringing on the rights of people who smoke?
You mean by not letting them smoke in public buildings? Or the trying to make it illegal to smoke inside city limits? Or raising taxes on tobacco to make it more expensive to smoke? Or which law are you talking about?
Guns, it used to bother me, but when you put it like that, I guess it doesn't bother me as much as the cell phone thing. As far as not being able to smoke in publicly owned or gov't buildings, I don't mind that so much. The rest of it gets on my nerves. Myself, I try to be a considerate smoker. That is I try and move away from non-smokers or at least stand down wind.
I don't think smoking is as much an infringement on rights as taking cell phone information as you are still free to smoke in your house, in your car, on your property. Now, if they made it illegal to smoke in your house or in your car, that might be another story.
Well hang on for the ride! Funny isn't it, jsut depends on which right the good ole boys want to take away. I'm not talking about the tax as I have never bitched about the price of my habits. You can't smoke in your car when in some parking lots (no I don't mean school property).
If I own the business, I feel it should be up to me whether anyone can smoke in my establishment. Everything in this country is getting carried away.
I think the best wisdom ever given in this situation is Your rights end where my rights begin. IF your smoking is violating someones right to not smoke then your in violation of that persons right. Now that is not a violation of your right to smoke. IF you could contain that smoke in your area and it wouldn't violate that other persons right there would be no problem. The other person cannot violate your right to smoke because their not doing anything to warrant a violation. This is a case of where right to life overrules your right to smoke.
Yes we all have rights, but those rights cannot interfere with another persons rights. Their is a limitation to those rights. The premise is that if your activity affects only you, and no one else then theres no problem.
Why do you smoke in public?
Quote from: greatguns on January 18, 2010, 08:49:26 PM
Why do you smoke in public?
For the same reason I smoke in private, because I want a smoke.
LOL
Funny! I was dierecting that question to the one that said I have the right to stay home and smoke, not to the one that has the right to stay home to breath fresh air. Thanks for your answer though. Now I better get off of this public forum and have a cigarette. You all have fun.
Quote from: greatguns on January 18, 2010, 09:58:06 PM
Funny! I was dierecting that question to the one that said I have the right to stay home and smoke, not to the one that has the right to stay home to breath fresh air. Thanks for your answer though. Now I better get off of this public forum and have a cigarette. You all have fun.
The answer is that you don't have anymore rights to smoke than someone has to not smoke. so the solution is not laws, but common sense. Would you smoke around a person with emphasema or lung cancer?
No Steve, I'm not a sheep by no means and if say I am, I'm gonna have your Marine sons put knuckle bumps all over your head and beat you with intent to do bodily harm !!! My wife says I have a hard head and stink'n butt so I must be a goat . :)
Jarhead, we need more people on the forum with your sense of humor.
Frank, most of the time I'm an ol sour puss. It's just that today I FINALLY made the last batch of deer jerky. No more breathing hickory smoke for another year and that makes me as happy as a pig in a mud puddle !!! Hell bells, I'm so happy I might go to the county barn tomorrow and give Varmit & Mr. Ks Hillbilly a bag of deer jerky to celebrate with me.
No, I'll be smoking at home where everyone is healthy. Possibly if you have lung cancer it might be a little late to worry about secondhand smoke. Just as I guessed, depends on who's rights are being infringed on. I just don't feel that the state of Kansas needs to tell me I can't smoke outside on the sidewalk because it is public. I am sure I will learn to live with it just as I have with wearing a seatbelt. Now you're going to have to argue with a fence post because I am done.
Hey Jarhead, that was some goood jerky!!
Speaking of jerky and sausage... Did you just choose to ignore my email on the request to give me the recipe on how to make it the way you do?..
My feelings are crushed! :P
Teresa,
Are you talking to me ? If so, as of yesterday I had 437 e-mails to go thru because of deer seasons but I sure didn't see one from you about how I make jerky & etc. I would be happy to give you my recipie----------------------as soon as Col. Sanders tells you what herbs & spices he uses . :)
PS; Did Jo share some of her summer sausage & smoked deer sticks with you ? Don't tell Varmit I have the smoked sticks or he will want a sample of them too.
Pssssst...jarhead....I can hear what you're writing. and yes, I want a sample of the deer sticks...but I won't tell anyone if you give me some.
Oh, and as for col. sanders recipie....its crack cocaine......thats why you get mad cravings for it at 2 in the morning.
Hey----of course I shared some sticks with Teresa and Kjell-- in fact, I let each of them have one bite each, off the same stick. Good grief, do you think I'm selfish? I sort of hated to share with anyone, buttttttttttttt I did. Everyone that has tasted the cheddar/venison salami has said how delicious it is. Fred and I have liked it the best of any we have ever had. Thanks so much AGAIN. I'm brown nosin' it is shameful, but I don't mind doing it, for something that good. I suck up to Jim all the time, for squirrel. Kissie, kissie, huggie hug!!!
One taste per person...That's it !!! Put it back on the plate !! NO MORE.
Quote from: jarhead on January 21, 2010, 10:47:48 PM
Teresa,
Are you talking to me ? If so, as of yesterday I had 437 e-mails to go thru because of deer seasons but I sure didn't see one from you about how I make jerky & etc. I would be happy to give you my recipie----------------------as soon as Col. Sanders tells you what herbs & spices he uses . :)
PS; Did Jo share some of her summer sausage & smoked deer sticks with you ? Don't tell Varmit I have the smoked sticks or he will want a sample of them too.
hey jarhead, since goat is very similar to venison, can you make the sausages out of goat? :)
I suppose you could Steve but we can't. We (meaning my nephew Hank, with me looking over his shoulder) can't do domestic criiters. Only animals with a "big Game tag "
Teresa, I about forgot to tell you what I put in summer sausage---your venison of coarse---pork fat---salt---pepper--- corriander-- mustard --- ginger---garlic powder---onion powder---whole mustard seeds-----liquid smoke---insta-cure and water. If you want to pay extra we add high temp chedder or pepper jack cheese. now when you make it, make sure you use the right amount of the spices------------------------and for a small fee I will send you that info. :)
Jarhead, I might need a small sample of your product. :-*
Quote from: jarhead on January 23, 2010, 01:59:36 PM
I suppose you could Steve but we can't. We (meaning my nephew Hank, with me looking over his shoulder) can't do domestic criiters. Only animals with a "big Game tag "
Teresa, I about forgot to tell you what I put in summer sausage---your venison of coarse---pork fat---salt---pepper--- corriander-- mustard --- ginger---garlic powder---onion powder---whole mustard seeds-----liquid smoke---insta-cure and water. If you want to pay extra we add high temp chedder or pepper jack cheese. now when you make it, make sure you use the right amount of the spices------------------------and for a small fee I will send you that info. :)
What about if it was just the meat ;) LOL or show me how to do it. We can trade product for education :)
i don't have any right now but will have this year probably.