# UK police can download the private contents of your phone in minutes without a warrant



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 30, 2018)

The UK police can download your phone data without a warrant in a matter of minutes, a shocking video has revealed.

The footage shows how officers can use a machine to extract all kinds of information, including location data, deleted pictures and encrypted messages.

London-based charity Privacy International has highlighted how police access people's passwords, internet searches and emails without prior permission.

The technology, which was shown on BBC's Victoria Derbyshire show, is currently used by at least 26 police forces in England and Wales. 

Using this machine, officers are able to access deleted data, including messages sent to the phone by other people. 








n Derbyshire and Wiltshire, the police can even download a phone's contents without the suspect's knowledge. 

report. 

https://www.cellebrite.com/en/home/


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 30, 2018)

Surely this breaches data protection laws? Or at least some right to privacy laws??


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 30, 2018)

Yet, the police don't care about the Queen's offshore bank accounts that were recently part of that big scandal of tax evasion a year or so back, hehehehe  Ah, the law only applies to middle and lower classes ~


----------



## Vya Domus (Mar 30, 2018)

I don't live in the UK but I'm noticing some pretty big privacy violations such as that 24/7 number plate tracking system.


----------



## Readlight (Mar 30, 2018)

Phones under 200 euro are not protected from everything there are apps to easy transfer user data to a new phone, not a big surprise.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Mar 30, 2018)

They will then have to spends hours going through all those selfies.


----------



## enxo218 (Mar 30, 2018)

I feel in this generation the law has become obscured and mostly perverted in the pursuit of justice and its long technological arm has afforded this far too easily


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 30, 2018)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Surely this breaches data protection laws? Or at least some right to privacy laws


Pretty sure they can Justify the searching of Phones on the Grounds of Probable Cause

Or any of the Below


----------



## Tatty_One (Mar 30, 2018)

This has been happening for 15 years since revised Anti terrorist laws were introduced in the UK, I also believe that it is the case in the US, I seem to recall it was banned in the US in 2014 and then the powers were reinstated through the courts in 2015 but not totally sure on that.  I would mind less if I thought that the powers were only being used to prevent terrorism, however in order to believe that I would have to have total trust in those doing it.


----------



## AsRock (Mar 30, 2018)

After living in the UK for 30 years and what it was getting like back in early 2k this don't surprise me, i personally see it as a catch 22 even more so with those bombs going off.  How ever i think it's a bit to easy but time is of a essence right ?.

I be silly to think they do not do this already in the US, but if they came out and said it well i have nothing to hide so why care. In the end privicy has been a illusion for years now.


----------



## bug (Mar 30, 2018)

Not sure how this is different from police searching your pockets. They don't need a warrant for that, do they?


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 30, 2018)

AsRock said:


> In the end privicy has been a illusion for years now.



While true, I have to say, I enjoy living in small town USA where there is not much traffic, or cameras making me feel caged. It just isn't natural to be watched 24.7. I also have electrical tape over my cameras on my phone and laptop. 

So I would say it all depends where you live really. I'm quite happy living the slow life out in the middle of nowhere, helps me feel more connected with Earth and the Cosmos in general.


----------



## bug (Mar 30, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> While true, I have to say, I enjoy living in small town USA where there is not much traffic, or cameras making me feel caged. It just isn't natural to be watched 24.7. I also have electrical tape over my cameras on my phone and laptop.
> 
> So I would say it all depends where you live really. I'm quite happy living the slow life out in the middle of nowhere, helps me feel more connected with Earth and the Cosmos in general.


Actually, if you really think about, the default is to be watched, unless you're actively hiding. As soon as you step out of your house/apartment/shack/cave, everyone can see you. I think it's being _recorded_ that tends to scare people. (And if you think about asking, no, I don't have the answer to the "how much surveillance is acceptable" question either.)


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 30, 2018)

bug said:


> Actually, if you really think about, the default is to be watched, unless you're actively hiding. As soon as you step out of your house/apartment/shack/cave, everyone can see you. I think it's being _recorded_ that tends to scare people. (And if you think about asking, no, I don't have the answer to the "how much surveillance is acceptable" question either.)



I disagree, the context is different. In the village life, one would have known ones neighbors, and that changes everything.


----------



## Ebo (Mar 30, 2018)

I have no problem with it, where I live it has been so for 3-4 years.
I just say f*ck your privicy, since all that teknology that surrounds us makes us more easy ti get to, but that how the world works in 2018.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.


----------



## bug (Mar 30, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> I disagree, the context is different. In the village life, one would have known ones neighbors, and that changes everything.


I didn't say it's the same thing, I just said that's the default. Even if we're inclined to think otherwise.


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 30, 2018)

Ebo said:


> I have no problem with it, where I live it has been so for 3-4 years.
> I just say f*ck your privicy, since all that teknology that surrounds us makes us more easy ti get to, but that how the world works in 2018.
> 
> If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.



I have nothing to hide, but cameras kind of ruin the moment if your trying to enjoy nature and be more in touch with the cosmos through meditation in peaceful areas. I am well aware I am niche community though,   I am never leaving small town USA, unless they get cameras and noise pollution, in which case I will be moving to farmland USA. huhuhu


----------



## bug (Mar 30, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> I have nothing to hide, but cameras kind of ruin the moment if your trying to enjoy nature and be more in touch with the cosmos through meditation in peaceful areas. I am well aware I am niche community though,   I am never leaving small town USA, unless they get cameras and noise pollution, in which case I will be moving to farmland USA. huhuhu


Not disagreeing with you, but as you have noted, technology, sensors and camera are only becoming more pervasive. Regardless of what you and I wish.


----------



## natr0n (Mar 30, 2018)

Let them try.


----------



## remixedcat (Mar 30, 2018)

aaah the UK, where some comedian can make a joke vid of a dog doing thew hitler salute and get 2 yrs+, yet a serial rapist gets away with it.


----------



## Papahyooie (Mar 30, 2018)

"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."

That makes the HUGE assumption that the people doing the watching have your best interest in mind. The statement means something totally different, depending on who says it... and how much fear is warranted depends on that too. 

When someone says "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"... is it Ghandi saying it? Or Hitler?


----------



## Shihab (Mar 30, 2018)

Can they force you to unlock a phone? I recall that American judiciary do throw you in a cell until you do (forever, if you refused), but what about the Brits?

If not, shouldn't unlocking phones with a stupidly complicated password and encrypting the drive (default on new droids) on an up-to-date system prevent this? Genuinely asking. Haven't really read much about cellebrite..


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 30, 2018)

Shihabyooo said:


> Can they force you to unlock a phone? I recall that American judiciary do throw you in a cell until you do (forever, if you refused), but what about the Brits?


yes they Can they use same legislation as used for Access to password protected Computers 
in the eyes of the law its just another Computer as Defined by them


----------



## delshay (Mar 30, 2018)

Being an x BT Techician (sacked) it's not the Police you have to worry about, it's the employee's. I have caught employee's tapping into end user conversation, reported it, but their trying to make it look like something else, ie cover it up. When you have people with lots of power their can make you look like a fool & no one will believe you.

So when you hear story's of Roswell, aliens or employee's of moon project (fake moon landing) you have to believe them. I posted a video of the employee intercepting end users calls on Youtube, it's even got me in the video, but the audio is not clear as their are cooling fans covering the audio, but with expert equipment the audio can be extracted.

If you point the video to any BT Techician, he will say that's a very strange behaviour. I would not go as far as reporting it to high ranking managers & ringing the Police if it was fake. BT/Openreach just needs to check the customer call log as video is in real time. 

Strange still why has BT/Openreach not prosecuted me or taken action against me, Is it to dumb down what I am saying. It's clear cut data breach by the employee. If I get request I will post link to the video on Youtube.


----------



## StrayKAT (Mar 30, 2018)

Europe sounds increasingly dangerous.. in more than ways than one.


----------



## Beastie (Mar 30, 2018)

It's not just the police, basically any governent department can legally access any electronic communication if permission is granted by the Investigatory Powers Commission who basically rubber stamp all such requests.

Investigatory Powers Act 2016

We have no privacy whatsoever.


----------



## taz420nj (Apr 2, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I don't live in the UK but I'm noticing some pretty big privacy violations such as that 24/7 number plate tracking system.


People really have a warped perception of what constitutes "privacy".  License plates are not private. Neither is anything you do in a public place. Think of the plate tracking as people sitting there writing down every plate that goes by.  There's nothing illegal about it because you are driving on public streets, and nothing you do there is private.  Therefore ANYONE can photograph and record you without your consent, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it - besides not go out.  People here are all in a snit over police using automated plate readers too.  But once again, it's perfectly legal because your license plate is not private.  I happen to be a supporter of the technology because it helps the police much more easily find stolen cars and criminals.  Last year one of our sheriff's deputies was doing plate scanning on I-70 and he got a hit on a stolen.  He began a pursuit which the suspect wrecked out and fled into a small town.  After a 3 hour manhunt, he stole another vehicle and tried to escape.  Another chase ensued, and a couple miles later he wrecked again off an overpass.  Once they had him in custody and identified him, it turned out he was wanted in connection with the kidnapping and rape of a 13 year old girl (among numerous other violent crimes) in Georgia.  So yeah.  Install those suckers on every patrol car and catch em all.

As for the original story, there's really not a lot you can do in a country that doesn't have a Constitution protecting its citizens from unlawful police activity.  Maybe their people should take a stand rather than pressing their lips to her majesty's royal bum..


----------



## taz420nj (Apr 2, 2018)

Shihabyooo said:


> Can they force you to unlock a phone? *I recall that American judiciary do throw you in a cell until you do (forever, if you refused)*, but what about the Brits?



There are two different situations that have gone before the courts...  One where they KNOW there is incriminating evidence on the hard drive, and one where they SUSPECT there is incriminating evidence.  Both have had their day in court and there are several different outcomes.

There was one where Border Patrol found kiddy porn during an inspection on a laptop that was powered on and decrypted, but it locked when powered off, and the suspect refused to give the password, citing 5th amendment privilege. He was jailed on contempt, the judge not buying the "testifying agains one's self" 5th amendment argument because producing the password would not give the government something they didn't already know (that there was kiddy porn on the computer).

Several others have related to financial crimes where the government did NOT already know the contents of the drives - which were seized during warrant raids in an already encrypted state.  These are the cases where providing a password IS tantamount to testifying against one's self and aiding in their own prosecution.  There is a difference between being compelled to produce something physical (like a key to a locked safe) and being compelled to produce something that only exists in someone's mind (for example the cipher to paper diaries written in one's own personal code that are inside said safe).  Of course there is nothing stopping the government from attempting to break encryption through their own brute force, but so far popular open-source encryption like TrueCrypt and VeraCrypt are proving impossible for the FBI to crack - thus they need an easy shortcut in the form of attempting to compel the suspect to give up the password.  As I said, the appellate courts have actually gone both ways on this.  A couple have upheld the contempt charges, while others have tossed them on 5th amendment grounds. None as of yet have made it to the Supreme Court.  Meanwhile the government is trying to enforce "Key Escrow", which is basically a back door into any encrypted system (the San Bernardino iphone is their big poster child for that), pulling the rug from under those who would rather go to jail than help the government prosecute them.


----------



## Steevo (Apr 2, 2018)

London has beat out New York City to become the most dangerous place to live. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/20/london-now-dangerous-new-york-crime-stats-suggest/

Knife attacks, acid, beatings as well. Also Scotland just spent the money and time to prosecute someone for a Nazi/Hitler joke, right after detaining a pseudo-journalist and kicking her from the country, and after allowing ANTIFA to try and shut down another youtuber during a public talk. While the US has issues, most are brought on the friction between cultures learning to live together, with freedoms some are unused to. The UK is slowly becoming a joke, allowing a minority of immigrants to drastically change the culture of a successful country, back to shithole standards for fear of "ism" and taking away rights in a highly 1984 Orwellian state where apparently now thought crimes are real, but real crimes like grooming gangs are OK.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 2, 2018)

Steevo said:


> London has beat out New York City to become the most dangerous place to live. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/20/london-now-dangerous-new-york-crime-stats-suggest/


New York City is safe as far as US cities are concerned.  I mean, it's like 50th among US cities:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

NYC has probably the biggest police force in the world though with 40,000 officers and a $5.6 billion annual budget.  London, by comparison, has 31,000 officers and $4.54 billion annual budget.

What the UK is missing is the 4th amendment which courts have ruled extends to personal devices.  Officers can't search your phone without a warrant unless you give it to them freely.


----------



## ArbitraryAffection (Apr 2, 2018)

Edited, I removed my inappropriate comment. Sorry about that.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 2, 2018)

Can we quit making blanket religious stereotypes now?  It's off topic, and Biblical law isn't exactly a house of fun either.


----------



## HammerON (Apr 2, 2018)

Warnings given. Please remember the guidelines:
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/forum-guidelines.197329/


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 2, 2018)

UK is now an islamic North Korea 2.0


----------



## Vya Domus (Apr 2, 2018)

taz420nj said:


> People really have a warped perception of what constitutes "privacy".  License plates are not private. Neither is anything you do in a public place. Think of the plate tracking as people sitting there writing down every plate that goes by.  There's nothing illegal about it because you are driving on public streets, and nothing you do there is private.  Therefore ANYONE can photograph and record you without your consent, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it - besides not go out.  People here are all in a snit over police using automated plate readers too.  But once again, it's perfectly legal because your license plate is not private.  I happen to be a supporter of the technology because it helps the police much more easily find stolen cars and criminals.  Last year one of our sheriff's deputies was doing plate scanning on I-70 and he got a hit on a stolen.  He began a pursuit which the suspect wrecked out and fled into a small town.  After a 3 hour manhunt, he stole another vehicle and tried to escape.  Another chase ensued, and a couple miles later he wrecked again off an overpass.  Once they had him in custody and identified him, it turned out he was wanted in connection with the kidnapping and rape of a 13 year old girl (among numerous other violent crimes) in Georgia.  So yeah.  Install those suckers on every patrol car and catch em all.
> 
> As for the original story, there's really not a lot you can do in a country that doesn't have a Constitution protecting its citizens from unlawful police activity.  Maybe their people should take a stand rather than pressing their lips to her majesty's royal bum..



Regardless of any of that , one should have the right to move freely without having the government track them 24/7.


----------



## bug (Apr 2, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Regardless of any of that , one should have the right to move freely without having the government track them 24/7.


Don't worry, you're not _that_ important.


----------



## Tatty_One (Apr 2, 2018)

It appears that some cannot post without religious bias so this thread is closed.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 2, 2018)

It's not religious bias when it's a fact. Only more islamic place than UK is Iran judging by how UK behaves for last couple of years. And the fact that UK police is clamping down on hate speech and treating its citizens like in worst dystopian sci fi movie should be concerning to you. But lets shell out warnings to people who dare to say it. You of all should be the most concerned since you freaking live there.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 2, 2018)

Tatty_One said:


> It appears that some cannot post without religious bias so this thread is closed.


Then please close / lock thread instead of leaving it open for more post crapping
thank you


----------



## Tatty_One (Apr 2, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> It's not religious bias when it's a fact. Only more islamic place than UK is Iran judging by how UK behaves for last couple of years. And the fact that UK police is clamping down on hate speech and treating its citizens like in worst dystopian sci fi movie should be concerning to you. But lets shell out warnings to people who dare to say it. You of all should be the most concerned since you freaking live there.


I thought I had closed the thread.....sorry, @RejZoR, your opinion is valued, however in this case, they go against the guidelines, but it is very easy to completely categorise a whole religion based on the few, your "fact" is somewhat amusing when you compare pro rata the levels of population in Europe of the Religion you mention.


----------

