Loading story…
US policymakers and courts are intensifying scrutiny of how law enforcement and federal agencies obtain and use location data, amid concerns that current practices can sweep in sensitive information about large numbers of people without adequate safeguards. More than 70 House and Senate Democrats urged DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to investigate ICE for allegedly resuming warrantless purchases of Americans’ location data, including how the data is used, whether employee access is audited, and whether data governance controls exist. Lawmakers cited prior DHS OIG findings that CBP, the Secret Service, and ICE violated federal law by purchasing/using location data without warrants and lacked required privacy safeguards; the OIG previously recommended ICE halt use of commercial telemetry data until privacy assessments and compliance controls were implemented.
In parallel, the US Supreme Court is poised to address the constitutionality of geofence (“reverse search”) warrants, with Google filing an amicus brief arguing the warrants are unconstitutional because they can identify all devices in a defined area/time window, capturing many non-suspects’ location data. Google noted it began storing Location History on-device in July 2025, limiting its ability to respond to geofence warrants going forward, but said the Court’s ruling could still affect other providers and historical requests; Google also reported objecting to 3,000+ geofence warrants in recent months. The case discussed involves Okello Chatrie, identified after police sought Google data placing devices near a 2019 bank robbery, and raises questions about the third-party doctrine and whether cloud-stored location data retains constitutional protections.
Mallory correlates global threat intelligence with your attack surface — know if you’re exposed before adversaries strike.
12 events from the most recent confirmed update back to the earliest known activity.
In its geofence-warrant decision, the U.S. Supreme Court did not decide whether the specific search of Okello Chatrie's location history violated the Fourth Amendment and instead sent the case back to a lower court. The ruling held that opting into Google's location history does not by itself eliminate a user's reasonable expectation of privacy in that data.
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision holding that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in historical cell-phone location information, requiring law enforcement to generally obtain a probable-cause warrant before compelling companies like Google to disclose geofence data. The Court did not ban geofence warrants outright, but said narrower and properly justified requests may still be permissible under the Fourth Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Chatrie v. United States, its first major case on the constitutionality of geofence warrants. During the hearing, the justices appeared divided, with indications the Court may preserve geofence warrants while imposing narrower limits on their scope.
Prosecutors appealed the Chatrie ruling to the Supreme Court, with oral arguments scheduled for April 27 in what would be the Court's first ruling on the constitutionality of geofence warrants.
Citizen Lab reported that the Webloc surveillance tool can retrospectively track the movements of up to 500 million mobile devices using data from the digital advertising ecosystem. The report linked the platform, originally developed by Cobwebs Technologies and later managed by Penlink, to law enforcement and intelligence customers in the U.S., Hungary, and El Salvador.
More than 70 House and Senate Democrats urged DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to investigate whether ICE has resumed buying Americans' location data without warrants, and to review its use, auditing, and governance of that data.
Google filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hold geofence warrants unconstitutional, arguing they are overbroad reverse warrants that sweep up sensitive location data on many innocent people.
By the time of its Supreme Court filing, Google said it had objected to more than 3,000 geofence warrants on constitutional grounds and had succeeded in getting some quashed as overbroad.
As of July 2025, Google began storing users' location history on their devices instead of in the cloud, limiting its ability to respond to future geofence warrants for newly stored data. Google said historical requests and other companies' datasets could still be affected.
In 2024, the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Okello Chatrie, reversing an earlier Fourth Circuit ruling in the case challenging the constitutionality of geofence warrants.
Nearly three years before the March 2026 congressional letter, a DHS Office of Inspector General report found that CBP, the Secret Service, and ICE had bought and used commercial location data without warrants and lacked adequate privacy safeguards. The OIG recommended that ICE stop using commercial telemetry data until privacy assessments and compliance controls were in place.
A 2019 armed bank robbery in Virginia led investigators to use a geofence warrant covering about 17.5 acres, ultimately identifying Okello Chatrie after his phone appeared in the location data.
Vulnerabilities, threat actors, malware, products, organizations, and breaches Mallory has linked to this story.
12 references tracked. Mallory keeps watching after this page renders.
securityweek.com
Open sourcetechdirt.com
Open sourcescworld.com
Open sourcetechcrunch.com
Open sourcetherecord.media
Open sourcemalwarebytes.com
Open sourcescworld.com
Open sourcetherecord.media
Open sourceMap indicators from this story to your assets and identify affected systems in minutes.
Every observed campaign, victim, and pivot linked to actors named in this story.
Malware, exploits, and IOCs connected to the activity described here.
YARA, Sigma, and Snort rules deployed to your SIEM as soon as they’re published.
Get matching new stories delivered to your team as they break — not the next morning.
Ask questions about this story and take action on the answers.
Other stories Mallory is tracking that overlap on entities, sources, or topic labels.
A federal judge ordered the FBI to pause searching devices seized from *Washington Post* reporter Ellen Nakashima Natanson while the court considers claims that reviewing the contents would violate **First Amendment** protections for journalists and **attorney-client privilege**. The Post said the government refused to voluntarily refrain from reviewing the seized items pending judicial resolution, and argued the devices contain extensive journalistic work product, including tens of thousands of emails, interview recordings, story drafts, and encrypted **Signal** communications with more than 1,100 sources. Separately, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear a case challenging whether **geofence warrants**—orders compelling companies (often Google) to provide location data for devices present in a defined area during a specific time—are constitutional under the **Fourth Amendment**. The case arises from the prosecution of Okello Chatrie, where police used a geofence request to obtain anonymized location data near a robbery scene and then narrowed it to subscriber information; the petition highlights rapid growth in geofence requests and argues the practice is increasingly common despite inconsistent lower-court rulings and limited judicial guidance for balancing investigative needs against user privacy.
Jun 29, 2026
The **Department of Homeland Security** and the **FBI** are expanding use of commercially available surveillance and data-tracking capabilities, prompting renewed scrutiny over privacy, civil liberties, and oversight. DHS is reportedly preparing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on surveillance technology in 2026, including a **$1 billion** blanket purchase agreement with *Palantir* and additional investments in AI-enabled monitoring, mobile tracking, and tools from vendors such as *Cellebrite* and *Paragon Solutions*. Advocacy groups and lawmakers have warned that these programs broaden the government’s ability to scan faces, track cell phone activity, and monitor both immigrants and U.S. citizens while governance mechanisms fail to keep pace. The **FBI** separately confirmed it has resumed buying Americans’ location and other commercially available data from brokers, reviving a practice the bureau had previously said it was not actively pursuing. Director **Kash Patel** told lawmakers the agency uses purchased data in ways it says are consistent with the Constitution and the **Electronic Communications Privacy Act**, while Sen. **Ron Wyden** characterized the practice as a warrantless workaround to Fourth Amendment protections. Reporting on DHS also indicates declining transparency, with Privacy Impact Assessment filings falling sharply and the department’s inspector general accusing the agency of obstructing audits tied to biometric data management and immigration enforcement, reinforcing concerns that federal surveillance capabilities are growing faster than meaningful oversight.
Jun 29, 2026
US government agencies are facing renewed scrutiny over their use of **commercially available data**—including data derived from the online advertising ecosystem—to track people without a warrant. Reporting cited in one account says **Customs and Border Protection (CBP)** used “commercially available marketing location data” tied to the same ad-tech systems that power targeted advertising, reinforcing long-standing concerns that surveillance advertising infrastructure can be repurposed for government monitoring. The reporting frames the issue as direct evidence that location data harvested for ad targeting can also support state surveillance. At the same time, **FBI Director Kash Patel** told the Senate Intelligence Committee that the bureau purchases commercially available information, after being pressed on whether the FBI buys data that could be used to track Americans. Sen. **Ron Wyden** argued that purchasing such data without a warrant is a workaround to **Fourth Amendment** protections and renewed calls for legislative limits, including the **Government Surveillance Reform Act**. Together, the reports show that both border and federal law enforcement agencies are relying on the commercial data broker and ad-tech ecosystem for intelligence and location-tracking purposes, intensifying the policy debate over privacy, warrant requirements, and the broader security implications of pervasive data collection.
Jun 29, 2026