• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Supreme Court Just Expanded the FBI’s Hacking Powers

Rogue Valley

Slava Ukrayini
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
74,019
Reaction score
58,530
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The Supreme Court Just Expanded the FBI’s Hacking Powers


April 29, 2016

defense-large.jpg



The U.S. Supreme Court approved a new rule Thursday allowing federal judges to issue warrants that target computers outside their jurisdiction, setting the stage for a major expansion of surveillance and hacking powers by federal law-enforcement agencies. Chief Justice John Roberts submitted the rule to Congress on behalf of the Court as part of the justices’ annual package of changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The rules form the basis of every federal prosecution in the United States. Under Rule 41’s current incarnation, federal magistrate judges can typically only authorize searches and seizures within their own jurisdiction.

The amendments, drafted by a panel of federal judges at the Justice Department’s request, add another exception. It would allow a magistrate judge to issue a warrant to hack into and seize data stored on a computer, even if that computer’s actual location “has been concealed through technical means.” In other words, under the new rule, a judge in California could approve a warrant allowing federal agents to lawfully hack into a computer without knowing its true location, whether it be New York, Budapest, or one of Jupiter’s moons.

Justice Department officials defended the change as a necessary update to counter changing technologies. At the same time, tech and privacy experts raised concerns about the amendments’ reach. Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat and longtime critic of federal surveillance programs, also criticized the proposed changes as a “sprawling expansion of government surveillance. Under the proposed rules, the government would now be able to obtain a single warrant to access and search thousands or millions of computers at once; and the vast majority of the affected computers would belong to the victims, not the perpetrators, of a cybercrime.”

Wyden also said he planned to introduce legislation to block the new rule. The Supreme Court’s changes automatically go into effect on December 1 unless Congress votes to override them. Such a feat may be difficult this year as normal legislative business slows ahead of November’s elections. The changes come in the wake of a high-profile showdown over encryption between Apple and the Justice Department in February, which fizzled out after federal investigators told courts they bypassed the iPhone’s security features without the tech giant’s help.

The government assault against privacy protections continues.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Sigh. This is a great example of why the Supreme Court model is broken.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,653
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Simpleχity;1065820219 said:
The Supreme Court Just Expanded the FBI’s Hacking Powers




The government assault against privacy protections continues.

That is not really the problem. It is good that the fbi can do its job in spite of the challenges of new technologies. The important question to ask is how to use the technology to fend off crime, but at the same time protect the citizens from misuse. Jammering that technology is dangerous is not helpful.
 
Top Bottom