LulzSec Document Dump Shows Cops' Fear of iPhones 391
jfruhlinger writes "People are starting to comb through the details of the law enforcement documents made public by LulzSec. Blogger Kevin Fogarty noticed one interesting trend: The cops seem very anxious about iPhones, particularly apps that would allow encounters with police officers to be recorded. Ironically, the cops seem extremely concerned with protecting their own privacy, but the documents encourage police to examine iPhones during the course of interacting with the public to see what apps they have."
Next Killer App (Score:5, Interesting)
Network Storage? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is there an iPhone app that will send recorded video directly to the network? This will be an important feature when recording the police.
Even More Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
...is the document specifically instructing officers, that when they take an iPhone, for any reason, to stick it into a Faraday bag.
The document specifically mentions the "Where's My iPhone" app, which can not only locate the phone, but remotely wipe the phone.
Thereby making it useless for any kind of investigation. And because everything is backed up to iTunes, the owner can just re-sync their phone as soon as they get it back.
Here's an excerpt from the faraday-bags.com website, emphasis mine...
So even if it's inside the bag, they'll be able to slurp it without you or your friends/family being able to wipe it.
Re:vehicle cams (Score:5, Interesting)
A better example is the Robert Dziekaski Taser incident [wikipedia.org], where the cops tasered someone repeatidly for no reason and killed him. Lied about it. Confiscated the evidence to protect themselves. Only that video going public is what finally caused something to be done, because it so enraged the public that the government had no choice but to call an inquiry.
Re:Even More Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
Next killer app: One that wipes your data if your phone isn't able to check in for a certain amount of time, or if it's connected via USB when there is no service available. True, most people wouldn't want that as they could accidentally lose something, but for people who legitimately have reason to fear police confiscation of their phone, it could be worth the risk.
Re:Fundamental trust (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know what America you are referring to where people trusted each other more than they do now. I can't imagine that there was much trust between cops and blacks in the south before the late 80's, or between immigrant populations in the big cities circa the turn of the century, et cetera...
People are the same now as they have been for thousands of years - give people unchecked authority and corruption will reign. Recording the PUBLIC actions of police officers is a check on such abuse of authority. Imagine if you'd never seen the Rodney King beating. Would YOU have believed him?
Re:no expectation of privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to install DVR systems in cop cars. One of the options was a pre-record, so when video starts recording it actually includes up to 3 minutes prior. When an agency decided to turn this option all the cops went crazy (literally screaming at people about it, including me) saying it was invasion of privacy. I brought up the question of expectation of privacy when on duty in a patrol car, and that just incited them further. Needless to say cops seem overly concerned with their own privacy and think even when on duty in city owned vehicles there is an expectation of privacy.
Re:Funny... (Score:5, Interesting)
They (law enforcement) REALLY, REALLY HATE IT when the get caught on tape (so to speak) committing murder, beating the helpless, framing citizens, violating the "laws" they are sworn to uphold, yup it pisses them off!
Just a little "for instance" in San Jose, CA some year back two burly young 200lb plus officers wearing body armor responded to a "disturbance" at the home of a 4' 10" tall 88lb woman who it turned out had psychological issues, she had not taken her medications and was panicking because her child had become locked in the bathroom, she had been using an Asian-style vegetable peeler to try to pry open the door, when the aforesaid burlies saw the peeler they "thought it was a cleaver" and as we know two large men are no match for a distraught 89 pound woman! The officers, "fearing for their lives" opened fire and shot the lady many, many times (cops NEVER shoot to wound or disable) at point blank range!
IMHO, these men are COWARDS, SOCIOPATHS AND MURDERERS, but of course they were rewarded with paid leave and a pat on the back!
Land of the free & home of the brave!
But you can be shot dead anytime for anything or nothing at all!
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=CopsOutofControl#p/u/1/QwWJeAnobeY [youtube.com]
I would encourage everyone... (Score:0, Interesting)
who sits there sniping away about abusive/brutal police officers to go out and try doing the job they do for a week before making judgements with no grounding in personal experience.
Re:Fundamental trust (Score:0, Interesting)
yea but the Rodney King Beating was highly edited. what you dont see in the film is the car chase in crowed areas with children play and the part were he swing at the cops they tazzer him he get up cuz he was on PCP so he can fell it and attacks the cops again. you don't see any of that all you see and remember is that fact the cops beat the shit out of him. the cops only had a two option shooting him or using force to stop him and they mad the mistake ohttp://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/06/24/2017248/LulzSec-Document-Dump-Shows-Cops-Fear-of-iPhones#f not shooting him and suffered the repercussion of a witch hunt for what the public saw in a VERY EDITED VIDEO