"Defendants," the statement goes on, "have a legal right to challenge the use of electronic surveillance devices, and not disclosing their use could inappropriately and adversely affect a defendant's right to challenge the use of the equipment." Instead, what those NDAs are meant to do is keep people from disclosing the "specific capabilities" of Stingrays (and related surveillance gear with different, less-catchy brand names). Naturally, the Bureau takes this part pretty seriously. A lawsuit filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union against the Erie County Sheriff's Office last year revealed the FBI even reserved the right to ask local PDs to drop cases entirely if the sanctity of the Stingray's capabilities or details on how they were used in investigations fell into peril. Thing is, even that's a moot point now: The press corps has done a fine job of unearthing those capabilities and sharing them with the public at large anyway.

While today's release gives us just a little more insight on the curious relationship between the Feds and local law enforcement where surveillance is concerned, don't think the move will usher in a golden age of transparency. After all, Florida-based Harris Corporation -- also known as the people who make and market the Stingray -- is known to broker non-disclosure agreements with law enforcement agencies themselves, barring them from "discussing, publishing, releasing or disclosing" any information related to its surveillance products.