Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday March 21 2017, @06:21PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-that-Gary-Larson dept.

Police in a small suburban town of 50,000 people just outside Minneapolis, Minnesota, have won a court order requiring Google to determine who has used its search engine to look up the name of a local financial fraud victim.

The court order demanding such a massive search is perhaps the most expansive one we've seen unconnected to the US national security apparatus and, if carried out, could set an Orwellian precedent in a bid by the Edina Police Department to solve a wire-fraud crime worth less than $30,000.

Investigators are focusing their probe on an online photo of someone with the same name of a local financial fraud victim. The image turned up on a fake passport used to trick a credit union to fraudulently transfer $28,500 out of an Edina man's account, police said. The bogus passport was faxed to the credit union using a spoofed phone number to mimic the victim's phone, according to the warrant application. (To protect the victim's privacy, Ars is not publishing his name that was listed throughout the warrant signed February 1 by Hennepin County Senior Judge Gary Larson.)

The warrant demands Google to help police determine who searched for variations of the victim's name between December 1 of last year through January 7, 2017. A Google search, the warrant application says, reveals the photo used on the bogus passport. The image was not rendered on Yahoo or Bing, according to the documents. The warrant commands Google to divulge "any/all user or subscriber information"—including e-mail addresses, payment information, MAC addresses, social security numbers, dates of birth, and IP addresses—of anybody who conducted a search for the victim's name.

Source: ArsTechnica


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 21 2017, @07:33PM

    by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Tuesday March 21 2017, @07:33PM (#482336) Homepage
    If they're asking for some information that might help police identify and locate suspects for a crime, why shouldn't they be able to ask for all information that might help police identify and locate suspects for a crime? What makes some bits of information fair game, and other bits sacred? Yes, it's kinda odd that google might have that information, but I'd rather it slipped out in court proceedings that the information was provided by this request, than to not know what google can provide.

    Google still shows me adverts in a language which is neither one that I understand, nor is an official language in the country where I live - so I'm still fairly happy that it doesn't appear to know much about me. I've only ever typed my ID number into HTTPS forms for known trusted 3rd parties (mostly governmental, or banking), so I'd be very surprised if google knew that.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2