SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
One lesson from the 2011 uprisings in Egypt was that mobile phones are able to transform ordinary citizens disenchanted by their governments, into resistance fighters.
California "Kill Switch" Bill Could Be Used to Disrupt Protests
This week the California legislature passed a bill that requires all smartphones to include a "kill switch" that can remotely render the device inoperable. Although created to deter smartphone theft, this kill switch mandate could actually become a nefarious tool co-opted by government to suppress protests.
Aug 17, 2014
This week the California legislature passed a bill that requires all smartphones to include a "kill switch" that can remotely render the device inoperable. Although created to deter smartphone theft, this kill switch mandate could actually become a nefarious tool co-opted by government to suppress protests.
Kill switch mandates suffer a variety of flaws that CDT has discussed previously. However, the California bill is especially troubling on the issue of police using the feature to shut down phones. The legislation states that government agents may use the kill switch so long as their activities comply with Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code. This law allows governments to disrupt communications under certain guidelines with judicial authorization, but also includes an "emergency" exception that requires no independent approval.
Police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. This means that police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. It's not hard to imagine law enforcement putting such a label on a protest: Managers of the BART subway system shut down cell service in four stations just prior to planned anti-police demonstrations in 2011, claiming the disruptive measure was justified by public safety concerns.
This week's events in Ferguson, Missouri highlight the risks of abuse all too clearly. Police have repeatedly attempted to disrupt protests and ordered both demonstrators and press to turn off recording devices. If the California bill were in place in Missouri, these officers might deploy the government kill switch alongside tear gas and rubber bullets, using the mandated technology to stop coordination between protesters, cut off access to outside information, and shut down video recordings that can deter police misconduct.
The purpose of the California kill switch bill may be to turn stolen phones into worthless "bricks," but in its current form it could be used to brick protests that police disapprove of. Such a measure is unnecessary, and highly dangerous to the exercise of civil liberties. The bill is now before Governor Jerry Brown, who has a poor record on tech issues that pit police power against civil liberties; last year he vetoed a bill that would have required police to obtain a warrant to read emails over six months old (those not already covered by a warrant requirement).
So long as it contains the threat of disruption of demonstrations, the choice on this measure should be clear: It's time to kill the kill switch bill.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Jake Laperruque
Jake Laperruque is the Center for Democracy & Technology's Fellow on Privacy, Surveillance, and Security. Jake previously served as a law clerk for Senator Al Franken on the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, and as a policy fellow for Senator Robert Menendez. He grew up in Short Hills, NJ, and is a graduate of Washington University in St. Louis and Harvard Law School.
This week the California legislature passed a bill that requires all smartphones to include a "kill switch" that can remotely render the device inoperable. Although created to deter smartphone theft, this kill switch mandate could actually become a nefarious tool co-opted by government to suppress protests.
Kill switch mandates suffer a variety of flaws that CDT has discussed previously. However, the California bill is especially troubling on the issue of police using the feature to shut down phones. The legislation states that government agents may use the kill switch so long as their activities comply with Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code. This law allows governments to disrupt communications under certain guidelines with judicial authorization, but also includes an "emergency" exception that requires no independent approval.
Police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. This means that police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. It's not hard to imagine law enforcement putting such a label on a protest: Managers of the BART subway system shut down cell service in four stations just prior to planned anti-police demonstrations in 2011, claiming the disruptive measure was justified by public safety concerns.
This week's events in Ferguson, Missouri highlight the risks of abuse all too clearly. Police have repeatedly attempted to disrupt protests and ordered both demonstrators and press to turn off recording devices. If the California bill were in place in Missouri, these officers might deploy the government kill switch alongside tear gas and rubber bullets, using the mandated technology to stop coordination between protesters, cut off access to outside information, and shut down video recordings that can deter police misconduct.
The purpose of the California kill switch bill may be to turn stolen phones into worthless "bricks," but in its current form it could be used to brick protests that police disapprove of. Such a measure is unnecessary, and highly dangerous to the exercise of civil liberties. The bill is now before Governor Jerry Brown, who has a poor record on tech issues that pit police power against civil liberties; last year he vetoed a bill that would have required police to obtain a warrant to read emails over six months old (those not already covered by a warrant requirement).
So long as it contains the threat of disruption of demonstrations, the choice on this measure should be clear: It's time to kill the kill switch bill.
Jake Laperruque
Jake Laperruque is the Center for Democracy & Technology's Fellow on Privacy, Surveillance, and Security. Jake previously served as a law clerk for Senator Al Franken on the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, and as a policy fellow for Senator Robert Menendez. He grew up in Short Hills, NJ, and is a graduate of Washington University in St. Louis and Harvard Law School.
This week the California legislature passed a bill that requires all smartphones to include a "kill switch" that can remotely render the device inoperable. Although created to deter smartphone theft, this kill switch mandate could actually become a nefarious tool co-opted by government to suppress protests.
Kill switch mandates suffer a variety of flaws that CDT has discussed previously. However, the California bill is especially troubling on the issue of police using the feature to shut down phones. The legislation states that government agents may use the kill switch so long as their activities comply with Section 7908 of the Public Utilities Code. This law allows governments to disrupt communications under certain guidelines with judicial authorization, but also includes an "emergency" exception that requires no independent approval.
Police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. This means that police could use the kill switch to shut down all phones in a situation they unilaterally perceive as presenting an imminent risk of danger. It's not hard to imagine law enforcement putting such a label on a protest: Managers of the BART subway system shut down cell service in four stations just prior to planned anti-police demonstrations in 2011, claiming the disruptive measure was justified by public safety concerns.
This week's events in Ferguson, Missouri highlight the risks of abuse all too clearly. Police have repeatedly attempted to disrupt protests and ordered both demonstrators and press to turn off recording devices. If the California bill were in place in Missouri, these officers might deploy the government kill switch alongside tear gas and rubber bullets, using the mandated technology to stop coordination between protesters, cut off access to outside information, and shut down video recordings that can deter police misconduct.
The purpose of the California kill switch bill may be to turn stolen phones into worthless "bricks," but in its current form it could be used to brick protests that police disapprove of. Such a measure is unnecessary, and highly dangerous to the exercise of civil liberties. The bill is now before Governor Jerry Brown, who has a poor record on tech issues that pit police power against civil liberties; last year he vetoed a bill that would have required police to obtain a warrant to read emails over six months old (those not already covered by a warrant requirement).
So long as it contains the threat of disruption of demonstrations, the choice on this measure should be clear: It's time to kill the kill switch bill.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.