Excuse me, would you kindly tell me where the land of free is?
First and foremost: I completely agree. Now devils advocate:
How about unreasonable search and seizure?
Your choice to broadcast your signal gives implicit rights for them to read the signal, much like your choice to place your garbage into the county provided can on the curb.
No. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy. What about the privacy of the company who has licensed or purchased the spectrum? The signal is in their possession, and the government just trampled it like a heard of bison running over a bunny. Fuck no. Thats what warrants are for.
How about due process?
See above, there is not a due process violation if all they are doing is processing through the signal you sent.
Again, no. In court, if I can't inspect the device that grabbed what they *THOUGHT* was my signal, how could I defend myself? These law enforcement toys are secret, beyond discovery from defense attorneys. So how can you question the charges, or face your accuser, which you are allowed to do. Imagine for a moment that there is a bug in the logging software, and it reports your phone as the one trying to hook up with the 13 year old middle schooler. Just, fuck no. Again. Due Process.
How about manufactured evidence?
There is a chain of custody to be followed, manufactured evidence would require breaking a seal on the device, much like a radar gun.
Not what I was saying. What about "we can't let them know about how we learned about this, so lets say he logged into a bogus website, and generate some logs.
Is using the spectrum like this even legal? Aren't they violating the licensing laws of the spectrum?
One would hope they got a licence from the FCC. *snort* (sorry, couldn't keep a straight face on that one)
Seriously though, the same argument that has been set forth about using open WiFi APs and even breaking WEP/WPA to use APs that are broadcasting past a property line apply here with your phone and any cleartext that is sent / cyphertext that is broken.
I'm happily in a state where a warrant is required to use one of these... not that I think they are used anyway, but at least if there is no warrant the evidence is inadmissible and via poisoned fruit any evidence looked for because of one of these also becomes inadmissible (i think).
This is not that. In those scenarios, your listening. These devices talk and impersonate cell towers. They are broadcasting in that spectrum which a company has purchased outright. They do so against those licenses. Now wipe that smirk off your face, and get off my lawn!
The reward for working hard is more hard work.