The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has formally invited private companies to share extensive information concerning commercial products and services related to what it terms “Big Data” and “Ad Tech.” According to a request for information (RFI) appearing in the Federal Register—the federal government’s official publication for public notices, regulatory proposals, and agency communications—this solicitation seeks tools that could directly reinforce the agency’s investigative and operational functions. In clearer terms, ICE is searching for sophisticated commercial technologies originally designed for data analysis and digital advertising that might now serve in the context of federal law enforcement activities.
Within the document, ICE acknowledges that it faces an ever‑expanding ocean of material—criminal, civil, regulatory, and administrative documentation—arising from both internal divisions and external collaborators. To manage this expanding informational burden, the agency presents its request as a strategic survey, a means of evaluating which analytic systems—either already established or newly emerging—might enable ICE to organize, interpret, and extract actionable insights from this immense data landscape. Specifically, the agency references its interest in tools comparable in scope and scale to those deployed by major providers of investigative intelligence, legal research, or risk analytics platforms.
The same announcement further clarifies that the federal government is eager to better comprehend the current ecosystem of advertising‑technology‑compliant platforms and location‑data services applicable to investigative work. ICE emphasizes that any potential implementation would need to operate within existing regulatory frameworks and meet accepted expectations of privacy. This phrasing implicitly points to the tension between leveraging commercially sourced information and adhering to statutory privacy requirements. Notably, the entry itself does not disclose which regulations or privacy standards might apply, nor does it identify particular companies, brands, or technologies under consideration. The language remains deliberately broad, offering only a conceptual outline rather than a specific procurement plan.
According to research published by *WIRED*, this appears to be the first documented instance of the term “ad tech” appearing in an ICE filing within the Federal Register—whether as a request for information, contract announcement, or justification statement. This newcomer terminology highlights a broader and increasingly visible trend: technologies once engineered for the commercial marketplace—particularly for precision digital marketing and data‑driven consumer profiling—are now being scrutinized for their potential utility in law enforcement and governmental surveillance. The incorporation of these platforms represents a significant convergence between the private and public sectors in the field of data analytics, blurring the boundaries between commercial data monetization and state security apparatuses.
When contacted for comment by *WIRED*, neither ICE nor the Department of Homeland Security provided immediate public responses. Historically, however, ICE has demonstrated interest in comparable large‑scale data systems. The agency has previously used the phrase “big data” in official contract justifications—for instance, in connection with Palantir Technologies, which supplies ICE with extensive operational and maintenance support for the FALCON system. FALCON functions within Palantir’s specialized Gotham platform, a powerful investigative database enabling law enforcement to store, query, analyze, and visualize large quantities of information. Gotham itself, Palantir’s off‑the‑shelf investigative tool widely adopted by intelligence and police entities, was further customized for ICE, evolving into the agency’s proprietary “Investigative Case Management” system.
Beyond software analytics, ICE has made recurring acquisitions of mobile location datasets—a type of information often derived from advertising technology networks, which aggregate user details harvested through commercial apps and web tracking. Such data can reveal numerous attributes about individuals: the types of devices they use, the specific applications installed, patterns of online engagement, and geographic movements inferred from GPS, Wi‑Fi, or IP‑based positioning. These insights, while marketed principally to advertisers, have also been available to government purchasers.
For example, ICE procured commercial location data from Webloc, a data collection tool distributed by Penlink. Webloc facilitates the gathering of information associated with all mobile devices operating within a defined geographic perimeter during a specified time window. The user can then narrow search results through filters based on the method of location retrieval—GPS signal, Wi‑Fi mapping, or IP address—as well as through identifying markers such as Apple’s or Android’s unique advertising identifiers. Reports from 404 Media have documented the manner in which ICE utilized such capabilities to monitor device activity relevant to its enforcement objectives.
In addition, ICE has repeatedly purchased licenses from Venntel, a data brokerage firm and subsidiary of Gravy Analytics, which similarly collects and commercializes consumer location data. Federal Register records reveal that ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division relied on Venntel software to “access and gain information to accurately identify digital devices,” thereby aiding its digital investigative processes. However, these engagements drew regulatory scrutiny in subsequent years. In 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accused Venntel of disseminating sensitive geolocation data for both commercial and governmental use without obtaining adequate user consent. As a result of this enforcement action, the FTC imposed restrictions prohibiting Venntel and its parent company from selling, revealing, or exploiting such sensitive data except under narrowly defined circumstances relating to national security or legitimate law enforcement activities. Importantly, Gravy Analytics did not admit or deny the agency’s allegations, reflecting the complex legal posture surrounding the regulation of digital data commerce.
This latest ICE request emerges amid heightened tensions and increasing federal attention following demonstrations in Minneapolis opposing immigration enforcement measures executed jointly by ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The situation escalated further after a tragic incident in which a 37‑year‑old Minneapolis resident, Alex Pretti, was fatally shot by a CBP officer during an attempted federal apprehension. Preliminary accounts suggest that Pretti may have been recording the officers just before the shooting occurred. As investigative details continue to unfold, the episode has intensified public debate over the scope of federal surveillance and the technologies deployed to support immigration enforcement.
Taken together, ICE’s Federal Register filing illuminates the agency’s growing interest in harnessing powerful commercial data technologies to complement its investigative mission. Yet it also underscores a range of unresolved ethical, legal, and privacy challenges that arise when tools originally built for advertising optimization and consumer analytics migrate into the realm of state surveillance. The RFI stands not merely as a technical inquiry but as a signpost in a much broader conversation about how, and under what constraints, data‑driven technologies should intersect with public governance and individual rights.
Sourse: https://www.wired.com/story/ice-asks-companies-about-ad-tech-and-big-data-tools/
