Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Surveillance

How the Military Exposed the Tools That Let Authorities Break Into Phones

The Marine Corps is trying to close a no-bid contract with Cellebrite, a company that helps police get into locked phones. The specs weren’t supposed to be public.

Matthew Petti | 10.16.2025 5:15 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
A criminal investigator with 2nd Law Enforcement Battalion (LE Bn), II Marine Expeditionary Force, Information Group extracts data from electronic devices with the Cellebrite tablet during an exercise in LZ Phoenix, N.C., May 20, 2019. | U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Luisa Torres
A criminal investigator with 2nd Law Enforcement Battalion (LE Bn), II Marine Expeditionary Force, Information Group extracts data from electronic devices with the Cellebrite tablet during an exercise in LZ Phoenix, N.C., May 20, 2019. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Luisa Torres)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) really doesn't want the public to know what it's doing with Cellebrite devices, a company that helps law enforcement break into a locked phone. When it announced an $11 million contract with Cellebrite last month, ICE completely redacted the justification for the purchase.

The U.S. Marine Corps has now done the opposite. It published a justification to a public contracting platform, apparently by mistake, for a no-bid contract to continue putting Cellebrite's UFED/InsEYEts system in the hands of military police. The document is marked "controlled unclassified information" with clear instructions not to distribute it publicly. UFED/InsEYEts "includes capabilities exclusive to Cellebrite and not available from any other company or vendor," the document claims, before going on to list specific capabilities for breaking into specific devices.

Reason is posting the document below, with phone numbers redacted.


These capabilities have not been publicly listed in full. "As part of our business practice, we refrain from divulging or publicizing the specific capabilities of our technology at any given time. This approach is rooted in our commitment to security; by not disclosing detailed information, we avoid providing potential criminals or malicious actors with any advantage," Cellebrite spokesman Victor Cooper told Reason via email.

The Marine Corps declined to comment, citing the government shutdown.

The document seems to corroborate common advice from tech experts: Keeping devices updated and turning them off are both important protections against law enforcement snooping.

According to the document, Cellebrite is already used by the U.S. Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division at several Marine bases as well as the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and is part of the standard curriculum at the U.S. Army Military Police School. The system is used for breaking into phones already in police custody, rather than hacking into them remotely.

Although the Marine document is dated August 2025 on the signature line, the phrase "V1.6 (20 December 2023)" is printed on the footer of each page, suggesting that the list of capabilities is copied from an earlier document. Indeed, Cellebrite customer support materials leaked to 404 Media in 2024 show several capabilities that the Marine contracting documents do not.

Its age actually makes the Marine leak useful in understanding the government's phone-hacking capabilities, according to William Budington, a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital civil libertarian nonprofit. Comparing the Marine documents to the 404 Media leak shows just how fast the cat-and-mouse game between police and tech companies moves.

"This isn't what they're capable of now. It's just a snapshot," Budington says. "The window of opportunity for them to extract closes if you have a phone that's been updated in the relatively recent past," he adds.

For example, the Marine document advertises "full file system capability" for certain iPhones running iOS version 15.7.1. That put Cellebrite a least a year behind, since iOS version 15.7.2 had come out in December 2022. The 404 Media documents, dated April 2024, show that Cellebrite had closed the gap significantly by then; it was able to break into certain locked iPhones running iOS 17.3.1, released in February 2024.

Meanwhile, "the variety and type of Android exploits shows that really, it's a bit of a Wild West out there for people who are trying to keep their Android devices secure," says Albert Fox Cahn, executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a nonprofit focused on civil liberties and privacy in New York.

Although the Marine document lists a variety of vulnerable lower-end Android devices, it does not list Google's flagship phone, the Pixel. The 404 Media documents show that Cellebrite can break into Pixels, but cannot decrypt the data on newer Pixels that are turned off.

Interestingly, the Marine document mentions that Cellebrite data has been challenged in court for "authenticity" by defense lawyers. "Cellebrite UFED/InsEYEts has been proven countless times to stand the legal review and thus allow for the physical extractions and evidence to be admitted into the court systems," the document states.

The Marine document also advertises Cellebrite's ability to extract a user token that allows police to log into a phone owner's accounts on Facebook, WhatsApp, Google Drive, iCloud, and other apps. Cellebrite itself has mentioned this capability in some public-facing customer support materials.

Another prominent Cellebrite customer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), claims that it only searches devices that are disconnected from the internet. But Cellebrite's ability to extract tokens means that even an internet-disconnected device could provide CBP with the ability to log into a traveler's cloud storage later on.* CBP updated its Cellebrite contract around the same time as ICE and the Marines.

"Law enforcement should apply for and get an authorized search warrant to get into these devices, which isn't often the case," says Maria Villegas Bravo, a lawyer at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, another digital civil libertarian nonprofit. "Usually, the way they get into it is with consent from the device owner, although a lot of the time the device owner isn't given full understanding of what they're giving law enforcement access to. They're just like, 'here is my phone.'"

*UPDATE: In an email sent after publication, CBP press officer Tammy Melvin told Reason that CBP officers "examine only data stored on the device at the time of inspection, disabling all network connections to avoid accessing remote content. Any passcodes provided are used solely to conduct the search and are deleted once no longer needed."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Trump Adds 3 More Names to the List of Enemies He Wants the Justice Department To Prosecute

Matthew Petti is an assistant editor at Reason.

SurveillanceCellphonesPhonesMarinesMilitaryPoliceDomestic spyingDefenseBorder patrolICE
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (16)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Stupid Government Tricks   3 days ago

    "Law enforcement should apply for and get an authorized search warrant to get into these devices, which isn't often the case," says Maria Villegas Bravo, a lawyer at the Electronic Privacy Information Center

    Again, fuck the lawyers and judges. It's real simple: can I do to the cops, prosecutors, and judges what these clowns do on their own? No. Therefore they need search warrants. This is not complicated. It's just the lawyers and politicians who want it to be complicated.

    Log in to Reply
    1. AT   3 days ago

      You can't shoot your neighbors either.

      But the cops can. Know why? Because they have a legal monopoly on the use of force, including lethal force. The limitation on that monopoly is that it can only be used for lawful objectives, and its use (per the Courts) must be necessary, proportionate, and objectively reasonable. This creates both a right and a duty* to use force for the cops - neither of which you have. Or will ever have in the American Justice System.

      *(Yes, failing to use force when appropriate can be problematic for a cop too.)

      So, it's not as you put it, "real simple." What you're failing to appreciate, if you're even aware of it, is that in America we use something called Delegated Legal Authority. This is something We The People give to the cops that allows them to do things we can't. Like engage in the use of force. Whether that extends from lethal force to physical restraint to breaking into phones is a question of debate - but what's not up for debate is the notion that "can I do it to the cops" is standard by which this sort of thing is measured.

      Also, language.

      Log in to Reply
      1. Stupid Government Tricks   3 days ago

        Your orgasms over cops' legal monopoly on violence does not square with waiting 40 minutes to ponder what makes an emergency.

        What part of "warrant" is so hard to understand? Two syllables is too many?

        Log in to Reply
        1. sarcasmic   3 days ago

          That was just someone wanting to use the bathroom so they declared emergency so they could get it over with. Impatience and an excuse.

          Log in to Reply
        2. AT   3 days ago

          I wasn't talking about the present fact pattern. I was addressing the core flaw in your premises.

          Sorry, let me dumb that down for you and the rest of the Reason audience: you said something stupid and wrong. I pointed out how it was wrong and why you are stupid.

          Log in to Reply
      2. sarcasmic   3 days ago

        But the cops can. Know why? Because they have a legal monopoly on the use of force, including lethal force.

        Scrape off the screen, dude.

        Government has the monopoly on the initiation of force.

        We peasants can still use force. If someone breaks into your home, grabs some of your stuff and threatens you, you can legally shoot them in the face (depending on where you live but that's the case in most states).

        Citizens can use force. We just can't initiate it. It must be in response to force or some other justification.

        Log in to Reply
        1. AT   3 days ago

          We peasants can still use force. If someone breaks into your home, grabs some of your stuff and threatens you, you can legally shoot them in the face

          No, actually, we can't. In such a situation, we could be - and rightfully would be - charged with homicide. A homicide DID in fact occur, and you WERE the one who perpetrated it. The actus reus was there.

          What we can do in such a situation is claim Justification. But that's not the same as a right - granted by Delegated Legal Authority to a monopoly - to use force (or kill) such as the police have.

          It's the difference between "You CAN [right], and possibly even should [duty], kill in this situation" (which the cops have) vs "If you DO kill it's not punishable" (which is what the citizens have).

          You may not fully appreciate the difference, but I promise you there IS a difference.

          Log in to Reply
  2. Chumby   3 days ago

    The system is used for breaking into phones already in police custody, rather than hacking into them remotely.

    They should get a judicial warrant to search the phone. Not like when Obama had Merkel’s phone hacked.

    Log in to Reply
  3. sarcasmic   3 days ago

    If you don't want ICE to have unfettered access to cellphones then you want illegals to rape and murder pretty white girls.

    Log in to Reply
  4. AT   3 days ago

    The Marine Corps declined to comment, citing the government shutdown.

    Hahahahahaha!

    Log in to Reply
    1. Chumby   3 days ago

      Yeah, that was some nice trolling on their part. They do more than just eat crayons and drink Dr. Pepper.

      Log in to Reply
    2. KARl hungus   3 days ago

      Please tell us about your time in the military?

      Btw: do you prefer to be called Uncle Tom or House N*****r?

      Log in to Reply
      1. AT   2 days ago

        I've never been in the military.

        Why'd you star out that word, KAR? If you intended to say it, then just say it.

        Log in to Reply
  5. Incunabulum   3 days ago

    I guess sometimes the crayon-eaters do a good thing - even if by accident;)

    Log in to Reply
  6. TJJ2000   3 days ago

    Yes; Get a 'warrant'. It is written in the Supreme Law of the Land.

    Log in to Reply
  7. ravenshrike   3 days ago

    "Interestingly, the Marine document mentions that Cellebrite data has been challenged in court for "authenticity" by defense lawyers. "Cellebrite UFED/InsEYEts has been proven countless times to stand the legal review and thus allow for the physical extractions and evidence to be admitted into the court systems," the document states."

    Case in point, between the two Karen Read trials Cellebrite 'updated' their software to remove an entry that was contra to the purposes of the prosecution.

    Log in to Reply

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Feds Pump the Brakes on Autonomous Trucks

Eric Boehm | From the November 2025 issue

What I Saw at the No Kings Rally in New York City

Nick Gillespie | 10.18.2025 4:46 PM

Utah's New Union Law Faces a Ballot Box Battle

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 10.18.2025 7:00 AM

Javier Milei's Libertarian Experiment is in Jeopardy. Argentina's Midterm Elections Will Determine Its Fate.

César Báez | 10.18.2025 6:30 AM

Needlessly Strict Federal Rules on Radiation Exposure Are Stalling Nuclear Power Development

Ronald Bailey | From the November 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300