Nevada’s Department of Public Safety has made a discreet agreement that allows state investigators to access a cellphone tracking system, which can map a device’s movements in real-time and without a warrant.
The contract, signed in January with Fog Data Science, allows investigators to query a database built from smartphone app location data. The system identifies mobile devices through advertising IDs and can reconstruct long-term movement histories, creating what the company describes as “patterns of life.”
According to company documents, those patterns can reveal where a person lives and works, the places they frequent, and potentially the people they associate with.
Under the agreement, Nevada is allowed to make more than 250 queries per month. Each query can either track a known device or pull all device signals in a specific geographic area, potentially capturing data on large numbers of unrelated individuals.
The annual cost of the system is about $12,000, funded by a federal grant. Because of its price, the contract did not require approval from top statewide officials and was signed instead through administrative channels.
Experts state the system raises Fourth Amendment concerns. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Carpenter v. United States that accessing detailed cell-site location information requires a warrant.
Fog Data Science says its information is anonymized and based on commercially and ethically sourced mobile advertising data, not directly tied to names or identities. Still, the company acknowledges its tools can link devices to locations and behavioral patterns. It also provides an opt-out mechanism on its website for individuals wanting to delete their datasets.
Nevada officials say only trained analysts within the Nevada Threat Analysis Center will use the tool, which is for specific criminal and counterterrorism investigations. In a statement, the Department of Public Safety claimed it operates under internal controls and constitutional guidelines and does not engage in broad public surveillance.
However, after publication inquiries, the agency amended its statement to say that the system would not be for generalized tracking, such as traffic enforcement, but for targeted investigative purposes. Still, critics say the technology’s reach is difficult to reconcile with its safeguards.
Similar tools are in use in other states for criminal investigations, including homicide cases and federal inquiries. But their growing adoption has intensified debate in Nevada, where lawmakers and officials have increasingly questioned surveillance practices such as automated license plate readers and data broker access.
Supporters of the technology argue it provides a cost-effective tool for understaffed law enforcement agencies facing complex investigations, including counterterrorism work.
The Old Blog in the Desert 
Leave a comment