Slashdot Mirror


Aussie Cops Want Powers To Search Any Computer

goatherder23 writes in with news that the New South Wales cabinet has proposed new powers for police to search computers anywhere under a search warrant, and adds: "The Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse are invoked to explain why police need the new laws, which have yet to be introduced into Parliament. Would someone please explain to them before this happens that all computers on the Internet are "networked" and that some computers may be found outside NSW (or even Australia)?" "Police Minister David Campbell says police are currently only able to search computer hardware found on a premises named in a search warrant. He says with the changes, they will be able to go a step further and search other networked computers, regardless of where they are located. 'What we know is that there are organized crime gangs who use the Internet and other forms of technology to hide their crimes,' he said."

18 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. Ineffective by explosivejared · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any organized crime syndicate worth their weight is going to understand how to encrypt data and use hidden volumes. With the seven day limit, that only allows for a cursory search and not the kind of in depth forensic combing it would take to actually find actionable data. So in the end, the only people actually harmed of it are ordinary citizens who are having their rights abused by heavy handed searches.

    --
    I got a catholic block.
    1. Re:Ineffective by superwiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So in the end, the only people actually harmed of it are ordinary citizens who are having their rights abused by heavy handed searches. And you assume that this is not the actual intent. Why?

      "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We *want* them broken. You'd better get it straight That it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against- then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    2. Re:Ineffective by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any organized crime syndicate worth their weight is going to understand how to encrypt data and use hidden volumes.

      I'm not entirely sure of that.

      Are all criminals tech savvy? Do they have an IT department to take care of such things? How much does organized crime rely on computers and network technology?

      Somehow I'm having a hard time imagining a bunch of people running a crime family sitting around deciding if they need stronger encryption, or different protocols, or using hidden volumes. I just can't see someone involved in drug smuggling, or extortion, or human trafficking firing up their laptops to print the cover sheet for their TPS report. :-P

      Maybe I'm totally wrong on this, and they're really dialed into these things. It just seems to damned bizarre to me as to almost be a sitcom.

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Ineffective by denis-The-menace · · Score: 4, Informative

      Then just clone the drives and give the suspect the copy and not the original HD.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    4. Re:Ineffective by AJWM · · Score: 5, Informative

      Attribution where due, please. From Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, which I heartily recommend. It makes especially good reading on a long train ride.

      --
      -- Alastair
    5. Re:Ineffective by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That would imply that the suspect has some rights and that the government doesn't strip the accused of every right they have as soon as the finger has been pointed. Don't know how Australia does it, but in the US, look at everyone who gets their gear seized either in a raid or crossing a border. Also look up "civil forfeiture" which gives the government the right to steal your property for its own profit without a crime having occurred.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    6. Re:Ineffective by c0p0n · · Score: 5, Funny
      Couldn't they just low-level image it and give the drives back? [...]

      Verbing weirds language.

      --

      Your head a splode
  2. War on Data by Chukcha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I expect that the "War on Data" will be as effective as the "War on Drugs", War on Terror", and "War on Poverty" have been. In other words, very successful at giving the state more control, more jobs, and more opportunities for corruption. Discuss...

  3. Get a warrant for one computer, get a warrant for by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The proposed laws would allow police to search computers networked to those listed on a search warrant. In a few words: Get a warrant for one computer, get a warrant for all computers worldwide that happen to be on the Internet. Gosh, and you Aussies let such laws pass without torching the parliament building, and putting all heads who voted for it on a stake?
  4. Options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, you can always move to the United States.

  5. Open up the border... To rivers running stupid. by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess it's worth noting that the law was just proposed, not actually passed. You could fill up a million pages on slashdot just with all the stupid bills governments all over the world table every day. So this is just playing on our guilty pleasure of ragging on any possibility of a law that would infringe on our rights, however unlikely they'll ever get passed.

    --
    I have nothing compelling to say
  6. Re:War on What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, for that is the real goal. What you are seeing are individual battles in the war on limits of government power. Every government, once formed, takes on a life of its own and seeks to increase authority, power and influence at the expense of personal liberty. Sadly, it is the natural order of things and the history books are rich with examples.
    Government power is like acid. It will eat away at the vessel that contains (no matter how well constructed, see the American Constitution for example) it until it escapes. It will destroy those in its path.

    I'm only an amateur student of history, but I am not aware of any instance where a government, once empowered, has relinquished those powers without force.

  7. In other poice state news... by Telecommando · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Criminals also use roads and sidewalks, therefore when searching a property for criminal activity all properties connected by roads or sidewalks to the suspect property should be searched as well.

    --
    Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
  8. Re:Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse? by Sabz5150 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What's number four?

    SCO.

    --
    "Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
  9. Re:Get a warrant for one computer, get a warrant f by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'd expect that from a prison colony wouldn't you? :)

  10. Re:Get a warrant for one computer, get a warrant f by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Before today you would have thought "Government Seeks Warrant to Search the Internet" was a headline from The Onion.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  11. RTFS by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...the New South Wales cabinet has proposed new powers for police to search computers anywhere under a search warrant, and adds: "The Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse are invoked to explain why police need the new laws, which have yet to be introduced into Parliament...."

    Read The Fucking Summary. Thank you.

    Or, if you still don't get it: The laws have been proposed, not passed. There's still the chance that parliament will figure out the implications and reject the law, in favor of sanity.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  12. Re:War on What, exactly? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm only an amateur student of history, but I am not aware of any instance where a government, once empowered, has relinquished those powers without force.
    Here you go.
    --
    May the Maths Be with you!