janrinok writes:
The WSJ is reporting that the U.S. Department of Justice is pushing to make it easier for law enforcement to get warrants to hack into the computers of criminal suspects across the country. The move, which would alter federal court rules governing search warrants, comes amid increases in cases related to computer crimes. Investigators say they need more flexibility to get warrants to allow hacking in such cases, especially when multiple computers are involved or the government doesn't know where the suspect's computer is physically located.
From the article:
The Justice Department effort is raising questions among some technology advocates, who say the government should focus on fixing the holes in computer software that allow such hacking instead of exploiting them. Privacy advocates also warn government spyware could end up on innocent people's computers if remote attacks are authorized against equipment whose ownership isn't clear.
The government's hacking tools such as sending an email embedded with code that installs spying software resemble those used by criminal hackers (sic). The government doesn't describe these methods as hacking (sic), preferring instead to use terms like "remote access" and "network investigative techniques".
Ars Technica cover the same story but offer some useful analysis of the subject.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday March 28 2014, @11:47PM
From the summary:
"...Privacy advocates also warn government spyware could end up on innocent people's computers if remote attacks are authorized against equipment whose ownership isn't clear. "
Well, we couldn't track down the operator of that botnet, but one of the infected computers belongs to a guy who posted a racial slur online. That means he has guns, so we need a no-knock warrant. Let's search his house and confiscate his nazi flags. And make sure we reveal to the courtroom that he was cheating on his wife during the trial phase.
*racks slide, click click etc.*
And if his dog tries to lick my hand I'm gonna shoot that furry fucker dead.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by snick on Saturday March 29 2014, @12:12AM
Funny how suspects turned into criminals in the title.
You did get the apostrophe in the right place ... so there's that.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by GungnirSniper on Saturday March 29 2014, @01:23AM
I changed the title to show Suspects instead of Criminals.
Kindly help the site grow by submitting your own stories. [soylentnews.org] You may find it is challenge to get them right, but it is more helpful than just sitting on the sidelines pointing out our flaws.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by d on Saturday March 29 2014, @03:10AM
I don't get it. How is submitting more stories going to improve the quality of the ones that are already submitted?
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Saturday March 29 2014, @03:39AM
By Sunday this story will be old news, and with more new stories the creme will rise to the top.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Hairyfeet on Saturday March 29 2014, @05:31AM
Sadly I don't have enough time ATM but I CAN point you in the right direction to get tons of the latest tech news, thus making more headline easier.
Just go over to The Daily Rotation [dailyrotation.com], make an account (so you can customize the headline) and then pick any tech sites that you like and voila! The headlines from dozens of major tech sites in an easy to read format. Couldn't be simpler.
As for TFA call a spade a spade and call it what it is....fascism. They are trying to get the peasants used to a police state now because they all know the truth which is the stock market is a giant bubble [youtube.com] and when it bursts it'll make the great depression look like a flash crash. Think this is about (insert buzzword design to incite fear)? Bullshit, just look at how they have been sending infiltrators to every peaceful protest of any size this past decade. No what its about is finding out who won't bow down so they'll have their nice little lists ready for the big crash. I urge everyone to watch The End Of America [youtube.com] by Naomi Wolf and realize that its MUCH worse than when she made that lecture 7 years ago and BTW...she is on the watchlist now, her crime? Giving a lecture on what constitutional rights you have and how to invoke them. If the founding fathers could see what the fascists have done to their country I have ZERO doubt they would have thrown the constitution in the fire and started over.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Saturday March 29 2014, @08:26AM
TL:DR
The greatest threat to American values in the world today is the US Federal Government.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday March 29 2014, @09:34AM
The American government is united in contempt for our laws and our freedom, across all branches. They know they serve the power elite only, and that thanks to the Internet and social media the fiction that they serve democracy and the people has been ripped away. They're trying to double-down now, and steal as much as they can before the hammer falls, but it's for naught. Where can they go to escape justice? Europe? Good luck, the top tax rate there is 90%. China? Yeah, that'll work out great. Brazil? Hmm, the favelas are already poised to eat their rich alive. Russia? Hahaha, boy, that's a good one.
No, they will be brought to justice as surely as the sun rises in the East. And it is long overdue, so. They have wiped their butts with our Constitution and our laws for too long now, and we must teach them the cost. What is needed is a second Constitutional Convention to punish the criminals who dominate America 1.0 and prevent such sociopaths from ever holding office again. If America can manage that, it will flourish another 300 years. If not, it will vanish into the pages of history as a testament to greed and crime.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 29 2014, @05:03PM
They need a warrant to get more access to their own computers? Apparently the Feds` network admin don't have much respect for them either.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by aristarchus on Saturday March 29 2014, @01:41AM
Exceptional crimes in earlier eras required sometimes loosening the standards of justice. The most famous was the crime of witchcraft. If we let a suspected witch testify in open court, there is always the danger that she will bewitch the jury, or even the judge. And since the damage a witch can do is so severe, it is better to be safe than sorry.
Amazingly, or perhaps not, computers have been subject to the same paranoid conspirial thinking. Mitnick was kept in solitary confinement because if he got his hands on cell phone, he might be able to launch nuclear weapons! So obviously we need to give law enforcement expanded powers, since no one understands how computers work.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 29 2014, @01:44AM
Allow hacking? I would think even the lamest of public defenders would be able to argue that if the box was compromised, there's no proof the user put anything on it. This is the creepy thing about mere possession of child porn being illegal. It's waaaay too easy to frame somebody if you "allow hacking". They should have to prove intent to distribute in such cases, with something other than a hacked computer as evidence.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday March 29 2014, @08:31AM
Don't confuse an argument plausible to a geek, with an argument that will overcome the gullibility of a jury toward everything a cop says. Add to that the fact that most judges are sympathetic to the State's attorneys and witnesses, if you do try one of these geek arguments, there's a 99% chance you'll look as ridiculous as Reiser trying to defend himself, and even if you are innocent, you'll get the same guilty verdict.
(Score: 2) by SuperCharlie on Saturday March 29 2014, @03:55AM
Anyone with the least technical common sense should realize by now unless you have a serious and non-inturrupted air gap machine behind locked doors which never, ever, ever hits a network with Internet, you should consider ANY system as transparent to whatever 3-letter agency wants to look at it and any local law enforcement who bumbles into it. Period. Full Stop.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by lothmordor on Saturday March 29 2014, @05:54AM
If the FBI has a warrant to remotely access a computer via malware, is attempting to prevent the malware from running an obstruction of justice? Does this make have a well-secured computer illegal, just like felt-tip markers [linux.com] seemingly are under the DMCA?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 29 2014, @08:42AM
I'd really like to see the UN and amnesty international declare that governmental use of malware against it's citizens is a violation of human rights.