Three possible misuses of the cell phone kill switch feature.
In response to a recent rash of violent cell phone thefts, California lawmakers recently passed a new law intended to help make cell phones less desirable for thieves while protecting personal privacy to boot. The new law requires all cell phones sold in the state to by pre-programmed with a kill switch feature that allows owners to disable their phones remotely in the event they are lost or stolen. The law will take effect in July of 2015. Many groups have opposed this law. A telecom industry trade group has pointed out that the law seems redundant given that consumers already have access to tools like stolen phone databases and anti-theft apps. The Electronic Frontier Foundation admits that while the law sounds good on the surface, it could cause a lot of mischief. Here are three possible ways that the cell phone kill switch law could hurt more than it helps.
Preventing Victims from Calling Police
The EFF warns that like all technology, the kill switch feature is susceptible to hacking. Considering that cyberstalking involving unauthorized access to victims’ phones is already a common tactic for domestic violence abusers, it’s not too hard to imagine a stalker using the kill switch to shut off a victim’s phone just before confronting them, to prevent the victim from calling the police for help.
Government Control of Information
Another worry is that the police or other authorities could misuse the kill switch to control the flow of information. Ostensibly this would be done for the public good, but it is still a concern. Critics of the law have pointed to a 2011 incident in which San Francisco Bay Area transportation officials turned off wireless cell phone service to quell protests in the wake of a shooting. Since this incident, an Amendment to the California public utilities code has made it illegal for communications providers to interrupt service without a court order. However, the cell phone kill switches can be activated without help from communications providers, theoretically providing both the technical and legal means to shut off communications without court order.
Concealing Evidence
One final possibility is that alleged criminals could activate the kill switches (or have family members activate them) to prevent incriminating data on their phones from being accessed by police with a warrant to do so. It is not clear how the kill switch “disables” the phone or how much data could be recovered following kill switch use, but killing the phones would certainly present a further obstacle to police investigating crimes.
