# Michigan Cops Snoop On Cellphones **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 20, 2011, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112 "2011-04-20T18:13:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/101 "2011-04-25T00:32:46Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Well in that case your computer is no different than your trunk. Someone gets a warrant to search your trunk and they can use anything else they find as well. Now if the warrant specified they could only browse certain directories, then it no longer applies (from my layman’s view). Say the warrant specified a single user’s folder on a 10,000 user system. It’d be a violation of scope if they searched all 10,000 user folders. It’d be just like a cop getting a warrant for a single gym user’s locker and searching the entire gym. > > However I don’t believe the legal system hasn’t adapted to this reality. Warrants wouldn’t be so specific so in that scenario it’s far more likely 10,000 people would have their privacy compromised. > However when the internet generation starts putting on the robes I expect things will change. I think we’re in general agreement, but I also don’t think you get the entirety of what I’m saying. Forget the 10,000 user system – a single user system has your banking, e-mail, Facebook traffic, [Match.com](http://Match.com) profiles, unfinished novel, the erotica you like to post under an assumed name at [NakedErnestBorgnine.com](http://NakedErnestBorgnine.com), and the pictures you took that Saturday when you hooked up with the skinny chick with the tatoos. And if the police have a warrant to search it, it’s ALL open to their eyes. That is, to use your analogy, one freakin big car trunk. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/102 "2011-04-25T01:02:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I think we’re in general agreement, but I also don’t think you get the entirety of what I’m saying. Forget the 10,000 user system – a single user system has your banking, e-mail, Facebook traffic, [Match.com](http://Match.com) profiles, unfinished novel, the erotica you like to post under an assumed name at [NakedErnestBorgnine.com](http://NakedErnestBorgnine.com), and the pictures you took that Saturday when you hooked up with the skinny chick with the tatoos. > > And if the police have a warrant to search it, it’s ALL open to their eyes. That is, to use your analogy, one freakin big car trunk. Well in fairness the skinny chick had an Ernest Borgnine fetish. We agree. That’s also an example of why modular security is important. If every site has it’s own differentiated password, and the browser is set up not to remember passwords, well they may have browser history and bookmarks, but they don’t have access to those sites. They’d know I’d visited [match.com](http://match.com), facebook, [NakedErnestBorgnine.com](http://NakedErnestBorgnine.com), the bank site, but they wouldn’t know what I did there, other than maybe page titles, unless they fished something out of the cache (also a security hazard that should be properly configured). Further browser history can be configured on how long it keeps things. Further using tools like [keepass](http://keepass.info/), and a portable drive to store the encrypted database keeps password management easy, and secure. That’s just good security anyway. Otherwise any rogue malware that happens to get on your computer could get your banking password. The tattoo chick pics? Well, that is a major problem, but the Earnest Bornine stash mixed in ought to ruin any jolies they get. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/103 "2011-04-25T01:13:13Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Further using tools like [keepass](http://keepass.info/), and a portable drive to store the encrypted database keeps password management easy, and secure. That’s just good security anyway. Otherwise any rogue malware that happens to get on your computer could get your banking password. Although I forgot to add a key logger could get it anyway if you manually type it. Keepass has a [feature](http://keepass.info/help/v2/autotype_obfuscation.html) that can greatly help with that (though a smarter keylogger could still get it). Anyway I’m gonna shh on the computer security hijack now.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/104 "2011-04-25T01:39:07Z")
What he said: > [@Bricker](#): > > …without ever having physical control of your phone to be highly remote. > > No pun intended. What he meant: [QUOTE=What Bricker actually meant] …_ **highly remote** _. Did you catch the really great pun I made? [/QUOTE] Whenever anyone says the first, they really mean the second. 😃 > [@Morgenstern](#): > > There are other, far less intrusive methods, of screening for Nuclear Anal Devices, (NADS) > Or, mobile nuclear anal devices, sometimes referred to as GONADS. It appears to be becoming a common practice when boarding an airline for the authorities to search for said GONADS. You fail your TSA entry exam. GONADS are in front, not in the rear. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/105 "2011-04-25T18:40:11Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > What he said: > > What he meant: > Whenever anyone says the first, they really mean the second. 😃 What do they say when they mean the first? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Raven\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@The\_Raven\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Raven_1)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2011, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/106 "2011-04-27T17:10:58Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > I’d be quite happy to hand over my cell phone data to prove I wasn’t in the vicinity of Bert’s bar when it was robbed by someone fitting my general description who used a get-away car similar to mine. \ That’s fine. You can willingly surrender anything you want to anyone you want to whatever end you want. You’re missing the point, which is whether the law permits the police to extract this data **without** your consent. If the police claim they can pull your data as part of a traffic stop without a warrant, that’s not right because there’s nothing in a traffic stop that would require such examination. If they have a warrant and have pulled you over for some bullshit excuse (or not) in order to execute the warrant, it’s a different story. If they are claiming probable cause to extract the info without a warrant based on the fact that there is information on the phone that would prove criminal activity on the part of the owner, I would think that wouldn’t pass Constitutional muster. The real question is what happens after you get arrested for something else. Let’s say that the traffic stop results in a DUI arrest. Do the police then have a right to scan your phone? Again I would think not, but these are questions that need to be answered. These aren’t questions of what the MSP have done, they are questions of what they think they can do as a matter of policy. Those are the questions ACLU should be asking \ ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2011, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112/107 "2011-04-27T17:19:27Z")
The Detroit Free Press ran a cartoon Sunday, showing a guy being pulled over and police demanding his phone. He suggested they should change the wording on the cop car from State Police to Police State. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-cops-snoop-on-cellphones/579112.md?page=5)