Police can add GPS to your car without you knowing

We love GPS. In fact, if we could close our eyes and entrust all of our driving to our StreetPilot, we'd gladly do it (don't worry; we're not gonna try). But we'd also be the first to admit that GPS has vast potential for abuse in the wrong hands, and by this, we mean of course, government and law-enforcement agencies. News.com has a good analysis of current privacy and civil rights issues related to the use of GPS by cops and Feds, including last week's ruling by a New York judge that it's okay for cops to plant GPS units on people they want to tail, without getting a court order or notifying the suspect. And experts quoted by News.com say they expect the Supreme Court to eventually validate such decisions. "The court has a very narrow and crabbed understanding of privacy. If something's not totally secret, you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy," says Dan Solove, a law professor at George Washington University. Looks like you'd better get ready for Big Brother to be with you 24/7, wherever you go.

[Lexor @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

On the other hand, if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about ;)

[Brett Dickson @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Of cause if you find a GPS device attached to your car there is nothing stopping playing games with the device. How about put it on your neighbours car for a few days, or jump on a aircraft - taking the tracker with you, or take it go-karting. The possibilities are endless and if you fill the logger with lots of obviously false information it reduces the worth of everything else (if some of the data is really fake, how sound is the rest of it).

[Wayne Lineberger @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Using the logic of the first comment, there really is no need for a protection of privacy at all, and the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches has always been totally unnecessary. Wiretaps on anybody and everybody would be fine. Why not video surveillance in every home? "Big brother is your friend." That is not a view I share.

[Sebhelyesfarku @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Lexor actually enjoys cavity searches, especially from police studs.

[Lars @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Wasn�t there something about every new mobile phone actually having a GPS chip in it? so law enforcement agency�s can track you down.

[Cameron @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

This reminds me (tangentially) about a story my boss told me. He bought a new car, Volvo something or other, and his insurance company told him that they would not insure him unless he had a lowjack on it. They provided him with a list of companies that would install and track the gps dealy. He then asked his insurance company if all the employees at these companies were bonded and if they had criminal record background checks. Not one did.

This was at a time when the Hells Angels had just infiltrated the Quebec version of the DMV and used info they had gotten to kill someone. He got the lowjack, but it really makes you wonder, who is monitoring the monitors?

(god I hate when I sound all tinfoil haty so early in the morning)

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Lexor-

Spoken like a true Fed.

[Bill @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

While the privacy aspect of your location is probably not arguable as the article suggests, there is a separate issue of the right to use your own property and 'unreasonable search and seizure.' Police should not be able to attach things to your car or put them in your car without your knowledge any more than they can paint your house so they can spot it from a helicopter.

Oh, and Lexor, I'm sure I've heard your quote in every anti-Soviet movie since 1940. It's the public policy of private dictatorship.

[juandoe @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Are we allowed to do this to police vehicles?

[ThomD @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

What's with all the beating up on Luxor? See the smiley with the wink? Everyone say it with me, S-A-R-C-A-S-M.

[David @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

First off, as for reasonable expectation of privacy, this is a legal term and the US Supreme Court interprets this term. It has been interpreted to allow police to use binoculars to look into your window and helicopters and infrared to see drug "grow" houses. Therefore, it would be logical for the USSC to conclude that a person has no expectation of privacy in driving their car on the road because anyone can see them.

As for #8's comments which seem to suggest that if a cop attached a gps device to a vehicle it somehow amounts to an "unreasonable search and seizure." Come on, that amendment to the US Constitution would not apply to this. Unreasonable searches and seizure has to do with what the police need in order to detain you and search you. By placing that device on your car, they are neither detaining you nor searching you.

I agree that if you find such a device, go ahead and toss it into a passing garbage truck or some other means to screw around with the people who placed it on your car.

Perhaps if that device had a video or audio recording capabilities, then it might be improper under the law. Otherwise, you paranoid folks need to realize that the cops will not be using this type of devise to track you unless there is a need. They really don't have time to harass everyone like you think they do.

[dingo @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Spidey Tracers for everyone!

[James @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

I'm just curious, how WOULD a GPS tracker look like? I mean, it needs a pretty hefty or exotic battery pack in addition to the logging unit, and then an antenna with some view of the sky. Where and how would the unit, battery, and antenna be mounted and hidden?

Or are they advanced enough like spy movies where it's a little dot with a beeping, blnking red LED? :) (I HATE LEDs that beep in movies!)

[Plinkerton @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

It definitely doesn't need a "hefty or exotic" battery pack. I have 3 handheld GPS units, that I use for outdoor activities and whatnot. They all run on standard AA batteries for hours on end. As long as they used anything with more juice than AA batteries, they could get decent life out of small units. Also, the biggest part of the small GPS units is the screen. For something like this, they wouldn't need a screen at all. It could just be batteries, and the chips, and the antenna, etc.

If they started doing this, or if they are already, you WILL NOT happen to find a GPS stuck to your car. Even some of the handheld ones can operate when thrown in your trunk. The technology is there to not need huge antennas, etc.

There was actually a story going around the GPS rings, of a lady who thought his husband was cheating. She bought a hundred dollar GPS, threw it in his trunk, and next week, retrived it out of his trunk, and looked at the track. She saw that he went to a hotel, or something. I don't know if it's true, but it would be possible.

I understand these GPSr's would be different, in that they would probably upload wirelessly to some computer somewhere. I would guess this would add some componants to the mix. But, if you are okay with retrieving the GPS later, it can be done very cheaply.

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Like Lexor said (sarcastcally, or not); do nothing wrong and you won't have to fear being targeted.

Don't you people understand that this type of surveillance is targeted at MEAN people (aka shitrats and terrorists)and not computer geeks.

OPEN up your eyes ya bunch of frickin sleepwalkers!

fer Chrissake.....

[Mark @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Email and phones require a government permit for a wiretap and we don't have an expectation of privacy on them! That this doesn't worries me it makes me think of the movie "Enemy of the State" No you don't expect privacy in public but you don't expect the government to be paying special attention to you either. If I found a device like a gps tracker on my car I would destroy it and, I would refuse to pay for it.
All communication devices are subject to government abuse. Cell phones and services like On Star can both be used to track a person's position with varying degrees of precision. The only thing we can do is demand that our local, state and, federal governments don't abuse their abilities.

[Marian @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

Mike, you think they target only MEAN people because you trust the government. But guess what: you don't really know if the government is a good guy or not, thus it's better for you to be protected by the constitution and by laws and not to hope that the government was, is and always will be a good guy.

[oj @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

how can you find out if you got one on your car? is there some kind of device you can use to find out [e-mail]

[Spoons @ Dec 19th 2005 1:38AM]

I wouldn't expect the Supremes to approve this one, despite what the article says. This sort of thing would be a tort if a private citizen (treaspass to chattles, or battery, depending on how it was done). I doubt very much that the Supremes would find that tortious behavior was reasonable.