Metadata analysis
Internet
This page is public-interest research. An argument grade is not a court finding. A watchdog page describes the device. It is not proof a Nevada agency bought it or turned a feature on. A product description is not a Nevada practice. Agencies are not merged: the City of Las Vegas Department of Public Safety, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, the Clark County School District, the City of Reno, and the Nevada Department of Public Safety stay separate. A hotlist hit is not a confirmed crime. Legal review of this page is unverified.
What it does
Metadata analysis studies the facts around a communication rather than the words: who contacted whom, when, from what address, and for how long. Call detail, email headers, and IP logs are inputs. The analysis draws a pattern from those rows.
Privacy watchdog concerns
No watchdog page is attached.
Constitutional issues
Unresolved question
Fourth Amendment, Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18
Warrant practice not established for a Nevada agency
Metadata analysis: No Nevada metadata-analysis program is documented. Smith is counterauthority only for the pen-register facts of that case. Carpenter does not decide this analytic.
- Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979). Counterauthority. United States Supreme Court. Smith held that a pen register of numbers dialed was not a search on its facts. Metadata analysis of many kinds of records is a broader practice than that holding.
- Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018). Does not decide this technology. United States Supreme Court. Carpenter does not decide every metadata query.
Statutes attached to read, not findings.
- NRS Chapter 239. Nevada public-records law is the route to ask for contracts, policies, and logs. Citing it is not a finding that a surveillance practice is unlawful.
- Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18. State search-and-seizure provision. This page does not quote the section. No section anchor was verified. It is listed only where a search question is actually implicated.
- 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A civil remedy for a deprivation of federal rights under color of state law. It is not a warrant statute, and it does not itself make a surveillance practice unlawful.
- 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701–2713. Stored Communications Act provisions for some provider-held records. Attached only to stored communications or carrier records, as the statute to read. Not a finding of a violation.
Nevada use
Not documented on this page.
Capability only.
See also: Call-detail record analysis; IP and ISP subscriber logs by legal process
Next record
Metadata analysis: Name the record type before requesting the tool.
All devices. A document workflow for this page is not built. The arrest correction form is not a surveillance-document inbox. Corrections and source documents for this page follow the corrections policy. Corrections policy.