Re: [tor-talk] Supreme Court Gives FBI More Hacking Power

[grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 4/28/16, krishna e bera <keb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> https://theintercept.com/2016/04/28/supreme-court-gives-fbi-more-hacking-power/
> http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/frcr16_8mad.pdf
https://www.justsecurity.org/15018/justice-department-proposal-massive-expand-fbi-extraterritorial-surveillance/

Among others commenting on the lists...

Rule 41(b)(6)
"a magistrate judge with authority in *any* district
where activities related to a crime *may* have
occurred has authority to issue a warrant..."

Note *emphasis*.

Perhaps missing from the article is that, similar to FISC / DC
situation, this seems to allow LEA / Prosecutors to now cozy all
these requests up to the friendliest court they can find (if they
speculate, when concealed, that the activities *may* in fact be in
that district [1]), rather than forcing distribution of requests
randomly across them all (similar to the old principle of local
jurisdiction... crimes originate randomly, are dealt with locally).

That would be bad... bad precedents, much stuff under seal ex parte
en camera rubberstamp etc.

[1] Without such speculation, while still concealed, they would
probably end up being lodged by location of lead investigative
entity (even FBI HQ), or by other elements of the case, such
as victim location.


https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/archive/docs/Rule41botnettestimony.pdf

Rule 41(b)(6)(B)
18 USC 1030(a)(5)
And remote access of hacked protected computers... that's huge
procedural change, and likely to be very sloppy and outright abused
for ages.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judicial_district
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk