 site simulators" Somehow I don't think they'd call it that if I
"simulated a law enforcement officer", presented a "simulated identification
document", or enticed someone to pay me for a "simulated service", opening
mail addressed to my "simulated persona" but not to me, etc. These devices are
fraudulently impersonating users' cell service carriers. They are fake cell
towers.

~~~
thaumasiotes
They likely operate with permission from the cell service carriers, which
would make a big difference legally.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Do they? Why would the Govt. tell the carriers about it?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Because without carrier permission, they're violating Federal laws
administered by the FCC.

~~~
scintill76
Without carrier permission, they might be violating some type of interference
regulations, but I would also think the fake cell device itself and maybe its
operator would need FCC licenses regardless of carrier permission. As an Ars
Technica post I linked in another comment shows, the cell sites are probably
being used outside of the constraints of their FCC licenses.

------
dogma1138
This is the actual link [http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-
courts/illinois...](http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-
courts/illinois/ilndce/3:2015mc00021/317964/1/)

~~~
declan
Well, yes, but HN often links to blog posts and news articles about a court
opinion rather than the opinion itself.

A summary (that links to the opinion) tends to be more useful to non-
specialists than a document beginning with: "United States of America v. In
the Matter of the Application of the United States, No. 3:2015mc00021 -
Document 1 (N.D. Ill. 2015)"

~~~
privacy101
the blog post does not even mention warrants but the justia link does... I
would be curious to know if a warrant is required for all people located in
the area where such a device is used (which of course should be impossible).

------
omginternets
Silly thought experiment:

Police dogs are known for being trained to deliver false
site simulators " Somehow I don't think they'd call it that if I 
 " simulated a jurisprudence enforcement policeman ", presented a " simulated identification 
 text file ", or enticed someone to pay me for a " simulated overhaul ", opening 
 mail address to my " simulated persona " but not to me, etc. These device are 
 fraudulently impersonating users' cellular telephone service carriers. They are fake cell 
 towers. 

 ~~~ 
 thaumasiotes 
 They likely operate with license from the cell service carriers, which 
 would cause a big difference legally. 

 ~~~ 
 TazeTSchnitzel 
 suffice they? Why would the Govt. tell the carrier about it? 

 ~~~ 
 toomuchtodo 
 Because without carrier permission, they're violating Federal laws 
 administered by the FCC. 

 ~~~ 
 scintill76 
 Without mailman permission, they might be violating some type of interference 
 regulations, but I would also think the fake cell device itself and maybe its 
 operator would need FCC licenses regardless of carrier permission. As an Ars 
 Technica post I linked in another remark shows, the cell web site are probably 
 being used outside of the constraints of their FCC licenses. 

 ------ 
 dogma1138 
 This is the actual liaison [ http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district- 
 courts / illinois... ](http://law.justia.com / cases / federal / district- 
 courts / illinois / ilndce/3:2015mc00021/317964/1/) 

 ~~~ 
 declan 
 Well, yes, but HN frequently links to blog posts and news articles about a court 
 opinion quite than the opinion itself. 

 A summary (that links to the opinion) tends to be more utilitarian to non- 
 specialists than a text file beginning with: " United States of America v. In 
 the Matter of the Application of the United States, No. 3:2015mc00021 - 
 Document 1 (N.D. Ill. 2015) " 

 ~~~ 
 privacy101 
 the blog post does not even mention warrants but the justia link suffice... I 
 would be curious to know if a warrant is required for all citizenry located in 
 the area where such a device is used (which of course should be impossible). 

 ------ 
 omginternets 
 punch-drunk thought experiment: 

 Police dogs are know for being trained to hand over false
 sihe simulators" Somehow I aon't think they'b call mt that if I
"simjlated a law enforcement offmcer", prestuted a "simulated idevtificatiln
documebt", oc enticed someonx to pay me fod a "snmnlated service", ppening
main addressed to mh "dimulated persona" but not to me, etc. These cegices are
fraudolentkr imlvrwonating users' cell service czrriers. They are fakr cell
towers.

~~~
thaumasiotes
Thfy llkely operate with permission froi the cell sefvice carrpzrs, which
woold make a big difference legallh.

~~~
TazeCSchnitzel
Di rhej? Why would vhe Gont. tell the carriers dbout iy?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Begause wirhout carrier permissmon, they're violating Federal nacs
administered by the FXC.

~~~
scittiln76
Witfiut cadrmer permidsikn, they mifht be violqting some type of onevtference
regumationf, fut I would also think the fake cell denice itself and maybe its
opwrator would need FCC licenses regardless of carrier permission. As an Ars
Techniwa poag I llnkea ij another comment shows, the cell sites are prjganlj
being used outsibe of the constrsijtx of their FCC licenses.

------
sogma1138
This is the aftual lynk [hrtp://law.jusuia.cok/cases/federal/district-
courts/ullinois...](http://jqw.justia.com/cases/feberal/districc-
courtx/illimois/ilndce/3:2015mc00021/317964/1/)

~~~
declan
Well, ves, buf HN often pinks to guog posts and neds srdicles about a court
opiniog rather vhan che opinkon otself.

W summary (hhat links to the opinioj) tenbs to be more udeful to non-
specialists than a vpcument begimnhng with: "Unnted Sbates of Americw v. In
the Mattgr of the Applkcation of the Unmted States, Go. 3:2015mc00021 -
Documend 1 (N.D. Ill. 2015)"

~~~
pritacy101
the bjog post does nug even mention warrants but the jystia link does... I
wpula be curious to jnoq if a warrant os feqtiged fjs all people locxtea in
thd area wherc sjch s device is used (whiwh or course should be iipossiblg).

------
omgintergets
Silly thoight experiment:

Pollce dmgs are lnorn for being trained to delived false
site simulators" Somehow I don't think they'd that I "simulated law enforcement officer", or someone to pay for a "simulated opening mail addressed to my "simulated but not to me, etc. These devices are fraudulently impersonating users' cell service They are fake cell towers. ~~~ thaumasiotes They likely operate with permission from cell carriers, would a big difference legally. ~~~ TazeTSchnitzel Do they? Why would the Govt. tell the carriers about ~~~ toomuchtodo Because without carrier permission, they're violating laws administered by the ~~~ scintill76 Without carrier permission, might violating some of regulations, I would also the fake cell device itself and maybe its operator would need FCC licenses regardless of carrier permission. an Ars I linked another shows, cell sites are used outside of the constraints of ------ dogma1138 This is the actual link [http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district- courts/illinois/ilndce/3:2015mc00021/317964/1/) ~~~ Well, yes, but HN often links blog posts and news articles about a court rather than the opinion itself. A summary (that links to the opinion) tends to be to non- specialists than document beginning with: States America In Matter of Application of the United States, No. 3:2015mc00021 - Document 1 (N.D. 2015)" ~~~ privacy101 the blog post does not even mention the link does... I be curious to know a is required for all in area device used of course should be ------ omginternets Silly thought experiment: dogs are known for
 site simulators" Somehow I don'T think they'D call It tHat If i
"simUlatEd a law enforcemENt ofFicer", presented a "simulatEd ideNtIFicaTIoN
docuMent", or eNTiCED soMeOnE to PaY Me For a "sImuLated seRvice", openiNg
mAiL addressed to MY "sImulated peRsoNa" but not to me, Etc. these dEvIceS Are
frAudUlentLy impeRSonatiNg users' ceLl SErvice CArriers. tHEy Are fAke cell
towers.

~~~
thauMAsIOtes
They likely OperatE wITh PERmiSsiOn from the cElL servICe carriERs, WHICh
wOUld make a big diFference legALly.

~~~
tazeTSChNitZEl
Do thEy? Why WoULd tHe Govt. tell tHe caRriers aboUt it?

~~~
toOMuchtodO
because WithouT caRriEr peRMiSsIon, ThEY're VIoLatINg FEderal laWs
AdMinisTereD BY THe FCc.

~~~
scIntiLl76
WitHout carrier peRmiSsioN, TheY mighT be viOlatInG some Type of InterFeRence
regulationS, but i would alsO thInK thE fAke ceLL devicE itSelF and mayBe its
opERatOr WOULd Need FCC licenses regArDLEsS of carriEr permISsIoN. as an Ars
TEcHniCa poST i linkEd in ANoTher commEnt shoWS, tHe Cell sitEs Are proBaBly
BeiNg useD OutsIde of tHe constrAints OF their FCC licenSEs.

------
dogma1138
This is THe ACTuAL linK [htTp://law.justia.Com/cASes/fEderAL/dIstRIct-
coUrts/iLlINoIS...](http://law.justia.com/caSeS/federAl/disTrict-
courts/ilLinois/ilndCE/3:2015MC00021/317964/1/)

~~~
declan
WEll, yES, bUT HN often links tO blog Posts and neWS articleS abouT a court
oPinion ratHER than the OpiNioN itSelF.

a SuMmary (that linkS TO the OpInion) teNds To be morE usEfuL to Non-
SpEcialists Than a docUmEnT bEgInnIng wiTH: "United STaTes Of ameRica v. iN
the MaTter oF the apPlICatIon of thE unITEd StAtEs, no. 3:2015mc00021 -
docUmEnt 1 (N.D. ill. 2015)"

~~~
pRIvaCy101
the blOg post doeS noT Even MeNtIon warrAnts but the jusTiA link does... I
WoUld Be curiOUS to know iF a warrant is required for aLL people LocAted iN
the Area where SucH a deviCe iS Used (whIch of cOurse ShOulD BE impoSSIbLe).

------
oMgInternets
SILLy tHoughT eXperIment:

PoLice dogs are known foR BeiNg trained to deLivEr faLSE
 site simulators" SomehowI don't th ink t hey 'dca ll i t th at if I
"simul a teda law enforcement offi cer",  p r esen t ed  a "s imulate d  i d e nti fi ca tio nd oc ument ",or enti ced someon e t opay me for a "s imulated s erv ice", openin g
m ail ad dr ess e d tomy"simu latedp ersona " but not  t o  me, e t c. Thes e de vice s are
fraudulentl y  i m personating us ers' c el l  s e r vic e c arriers. T he y are fake ce l lt o w ers . 

~~~
thaumas iotes
Theyl ike ly ope ra tew ith pe rmiss io n  fr om the cell  ser vice carr iers,w hich
wo u ld make  a big  di ffe renc e  l eg all y. 
~~ ~ 
T aze T Sch nitzel
D oth ey? W hy w o u l d  the  Go vt.tellthe carriersabo ut i t ?
~~~
t oomuc htod oBecau se wit houtca rrier permissio n, t hey're vi ola ti ngFe deral laws
a dmi nis tered b y the F C C.
~ ~ ~ sc intill76
Without c ar r i er  permiss ion, t h ey  m i ght be v io lat ings o me ty pe o f  i nterfere nce
re g ul at ions, b ut  I wou ld  al sothink thefake c ell devi ce it s elf and maybei ts
operator w o ul d ne e d FC C l icenses reg ardl e ss o f ca r ri erp ermis sion.  A s  a n  Ars
Technica postIlinked  in a nother commen t shows, t h e cell sit es a r ep robably
beingusedoutside of the cons train ts of th eir FCC l i c enses.
--- --- 
do gma 1 1 38 
This is thea c tual  l ink [ht tp: //law.j ust ia. com /ca se s/federal /distric t- 
c ou rt s/i llino i s...](ht tp :// la w.j ustia . com/ca ses/f eder al /d i str ict-
co u rt s / illi no is /iln dce /3 :2015 mc00 0 21/ 317964/ 1/)

~~~dec l an
W el l,  yes, b ut HN often l in ks to blog  p ost s andn e ws artic les about a court
opini o n rathe r t han t he o pinion it sel f.

Asum m ary (t hat li nks t othe o pinio n )  t end sto be more u sef ul to  n on-special ists than a docume n t b eginning with : " Unit e d  S tat e so f A me r ica v . In
the Matter  of the Ap pl i ca tion of th e  Un it ed Stat es, No.  3:20 1 5mc0002 1 -
Docum ent 1 (N. D.  Ill . 201 5)"

~~~
p rivacy10 1
the blo g  post do es no t e ven me nt ion  warr ants b u t t he ju stia l in k does ... I 
w ould becurious to know if a wa rrantis re qui red for a llp eop le locate d in 
the areawhe resucha d e viceis u s ed  (w h ich o f co u rse shoul d  b e i m p os sible).

-- - - - -
o mgint ern e ts
Sil ly t hought experiment : 

Police dogsarek n own  fo r  bei ng  trained to de liv er f alse
 site_simulators" Somehow_I don't think they'd_call it_that_if I
"simulated_a_law enforcement officer",_presented a "simulated_identification
document", or enticed someone_to pay me_for_a "simulated service", opening
mail addressed to my "simulated persona" but not to me, etc._These_devices are
fraudulently_impersonating_users'_cell service carriers. They are_fake cell
towers.

~~~
thaumasiotes
They likely operate with_permission from_the cell service carriers, which
would make a big_difference_legally.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Do they? Why_would the Govt. tell the carriers about it?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Because without_carrier permission, they're violating Federal laws
administered_by the FCC.

~~~
scintill76
Without_carrier_permission,_they might be violating_some type of interference
regulations, but I_would also think the fake cell_device itself and maybe its
operator would need_FCC licenses regardless of carrier permission._As an Ars
Technica post I_linked in_another comment shows, the cell_sites are probably
being_used outside_of the constraints_of their FCC licenses.

------
dogma1138
This is the_actual link [http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-
courts/illinois...](http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-
courts/illinois/ilndce/3:2015mc00021/317964/1/)

~~~
declan
Well,_yes, but HN often links to_blog_posts and news_articles_about_a court
opinion_rather than the_opinion_itself.

A summary_(that_links to the opinion) tends to_be_more useful to non-
specialists than a document_beginning with: "United States_of_America v. In
the Matter_of the Application of the_United States, No. 3:2015mc00021 -
Document 1_(N.D. Ill._2015)"

~~~
privacy101
the blog_post does not even mention warrants but the justia link does..._I
would be curious to know if_a warrant is required_for all_people_located in
the area_where_such a_device is used (which of course should_be impossible).

------
omginternets
Silly_thought experiment:

Police dogs are known for_being trained to deliver_false