The present paper discusses investigation methods for prosecution like the use of the IMSI-Catcher on the possible legal base of § 135 StPOnF and § 53 Abs 3b SPG as current regulation, the information about the identity of the holder of a dynamic ip-adress on the base of § 135 Abs 2 StPOnF and § 53 Abs 3a SPG, the Online-Search and the Date-Retention -Directive 2006/24/EC, which must be implemented by the national legislator for the purpose of investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime. The present paper determines possible contraventions of civil rights, caused by those new investigation methods.The use of the IMSI-Catcher can not be based on § 135 Abs 2 StPOnF. § 53 Abs 3b SPG infringes the telecommunications secrecy, regulated by Art 10a StGG. The information about the identity of the holder of a dynamic ip-adress represents a case of application of § 135 Abs 2 StPOnF. The information concerning the identity of the holder of a dynamic ip-adress based on § 53 Abs 3a SPG infringes the telecommunications secrecy. In case the Online-Search could not be realized from a technical point of view, using the software would contain disproportional risks (concerning noninvolved third parties) or the development costs would exceed the actual use, this investigation method would be disproportional and would injure Art 8 MRK, Art 9 StGG associated with the HausRG and § 1 DSG 2000. The comprehensiveretention of traffic data and location data without suspicion is disproportional and infringesArt 8 MRK.