Home | About | Donate

Supreme Court Quietly Approves Rule to Give FBI 'Sprawling' Hacking Powers


#1

Supreme Court Quietly Approves Rule to Give FBI 'Sprawling' Hacking Powers

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday quietly approved a rule change that would allow a federal magistrate judge to issue a search and seizure warrant for any target using anonymity software like Tor to browse the internet.

Absent action by U.S. Congress, the rule change (pdf) will go into effect in December. The FBI would then be able to search computers remotely—even if the bureau doesn't know where that computer is located—if a user has anonymity software installed on it.


#2

Issues like this make one so appreciate Ron Wyden but there are the many that make one so not. For example, I don't think he ever met a trade agreement that he didn't love, including the TPP, and then there's the many ways he has advocated for regime change in Iran, going back the 1990s, a sycophant for Israel and the list could go on but I think the confusion here is evident.


#4

I sure feel safer knowing that all of you are being watched.


#5

This is, in my mind, is inseparable from corporate domination of Citizens United, TTP/NAFTA/CAFTA "trade deals", historical criminalization of the labor movement, and the regressive societal legacy of predatory capitalism. I keep coming back to the fundamental notion of "externalized costs" to deny the legitimacy and integrity of anything potentially impacting a profit margin and its military enforcement sold to the people by propaganda for 'market share'.

The model inherently creates opposition because ethics, morality, equity, ecological balance and virtually all that is essential to life are sacrificed for guaranteed domination. The system is now totally divorced from all sources from it arose and towers over the devastation it continues to cause, swaying and threatening to collapse in the slightest breeze of change. Dead in other words.

Why do "they" hate "us"? The capacity to realize the origin of that question is important. What vested interest entities posed it with the firm intent to create a self-fulfilling prophesy; as a cover to terrorize and dominate the world - not to mention the tacit assertion that once that domination is embarked upon, it is irreversible. That is a deadly lie.

Now, the latest parasitic poisoning claims that the entire premise of innocent until proven guilty must be subsumed because the system is not dysfunctional enough without it.


#6

Information Marketing receives Equal Protection.


#7

The more you try to protect your privacy, the more interested in you they become. Life under the boot-heel of totalitarian capitalism. All you do, say, and think, is to be noted, collated, sorted, ranked and distilled into a simple "threat score". Exceed a certain threshold, and you become a target for "neutralization".

So mind your ThoughtCrime, citizen. You don't want to end up in room 101, do you?

Orwell did have some relevant advice here:


#9

I'm so sick of scare tactics these Oligarchs use to chip away our rights and the constitution. They go around the world making terrorists everywhere and then come back and scream "but the terrorists" as reasons to give up more rights. Our government is so broken and sick they all need to go. I'm thinking term limits on house and senate may help. We need Bernie in the White House.


#11

Wyden always sounds good right up to that predictable point of capitulation.


#13

One more piece of stupid, right wing legislation that will need to be fought by people. It is just getting to be that the money has all control, and that includes power over justices.


#14

We need dozens of Bernies everywhere.


#18

This is not really anything new except that it's being approved in the face of the voting public.

darkreading dot com/risk-management/want-nsa-attention-use-encrypted-communications/d/d-id/1110475? (sorry new users aren't allowed to include link so format is wonky)

We have leaked communications that document this going back to 2008, and I would be willing to bet it goes back a lot further. In fact, this may be better since it actually puts a FISA warrant procedure into the stream, which isn't there if the whole procedure is in the shadows.

Small comfort, eh? Sigh...

Shava Nerad
founding executive director, The Tor Project
long retired
speaking for myself, tyvm...


#19

The very first sentence of this article leaves out extremely important information and leads to an inaccurate understanding of the rule change. A judge cannot issue a search warrant for computer solely because it's location "has been concealed through
technological means ." But he now will be able issue a search warrant to use remote access on a concealed computer in regards to an investigation of suspected criminal activity. Obviously a normal search warrant will not suffice. Investigators cannot go to the physical location of a concealed computer to serve the warrant. This is where the remote access rule change comes into play.