TOKYO — A panel of experts advising Japan’s National Police Agency (NPA) on Sept. 2 called for the early introduction of “remote analysis” of smartphones used by anonymous, fluid crime groups. Behind the proposal is a sense of crisis that conventional investigative methods make it difficult to prevent increasingly serious harm before it happens.
The proposed measure also touches on the secrecy of communications guaranteed by the Constitution, raising questions about how to ensure it is used properly.
According to the NPA, losses from “special fraud” cases — committed using digital or telecommunications — including social media-based investment and romance scams reached a record 325.7 billion yen (approx. $203.67 million) in 2025. In the first half of 2026, losses were about 1.5 times the level of the same period a year earlier.
One hallmark of these crime groups is that they use social media apps to find and hire people to carry out these acts — so-called “dark part-time jobs” or “dark gigs” — all anonymously. These cases do not end as one-off crimes but are characterized by repeated serious offenses such as special fraud and robberies, with targets changing each time. Highly confidential communications apps such as Signal and Telegram are abused for exchanges among members. Communications between devices are encrypted, making it difficult to grasp exact details of the groups through conventional investigative methods such as communications interception or obtaining electromagnetic records from carriers.
The measure the expert panel proposed to overcome this problem is remote analysis. Police would identify and analyze the smartphones of those coordinating criminal activities based on reports from victims, statements by arrested suspects and information from people hoping to leave these crime groups. Investigators applying for “dark gigs” under false identities, a method introduced in 2025, could also provide leads.
Is remote analysis technically possible in the first place? According to police sources, the method would be similar to “active cyber defense,” or ACD, in which police and the Self-Defense Forces would prevent cyberattacks by accessing harmful servers to destroy or disable them. They would legally use software to hack into systems by exploiting vulnerabilities, the sources said.
In the analysis phase, police would search for information left on the smartphones of coordinators that could identify the next targets. They would obtain information such as the names and addresses of people at risk of becoming fraud or robbery victims, the division of roles and meeting places among these members, and lists of phone numbers and bank accounts used in scams, with the aim of preventing new cases.
A senior police official said, “Remote analysis copies and brings back the contents of a smartphone as-is. It will be a central measure for breaking through the wall of secrecy.” They added that coordinators in these criminal groups would also face the risk that their own smartphones could be accessed and analyzed via their connections to the very people they had hired to carry out criminal acts. The threat of this “should serve as a deterrent to crime.”
At the same time, obtaining the contents of communications involves rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Can such a system operate while staying within strict bounds, as is the case with regular criminal investigations?
This time, the expert panel positioned remote analysis not as an investigative technique but as a measure under administrative procedures. It did so because it judged that the need for police intervention to prevent harm has increased at stages before a crime has been established, including attempted offenses. But obtaining the contents of communications could conflict with the secrecy of communications. The panel proposed making a warrant a condition, as in criminal investigations, and, on the premise of judicial review, said, “The secrecy of communications is a constitutional right, but it is also recognized that it may be subject to necessary and reasonable restrictions for the public’s welfare.”
Information obtained through remote analysis under administrative investigative authority is expected to be used not only to prevent harm but also in later criminal investigations. The panel has in mind court precedents that allowed information uncovered in tax investigations to be diverted for use as evidence in criminal cases.
The NPA says its commissioner general will designate specialists in charge of analysis and separate their roles from those of police officers who handle victim protection and other responses, to ensure thorough information management.
Because remote analysis is conducted without notifying the user, rules will also be established for notification after the fact. The agency says it will notify users promptly when it determines that doing so “will no longer hinder the prevention of criminal harm,” but specific operational details have yet to be discussed.
(Japanese original by Makoto Fukazu, Tokyo City News Department)
Click Here For The Original Source.
