US District Court Says Calculating a Hash Value = Search

bfwebster writes "Orin Kerr over at The Volokh Conspiracy (a great legal blog, BTW) reports on a US District Court ruling issued just last week which finds that doing hash calculations on a hard drive is a form of search and thus subject to 4th Amendment limitations. In this particular case, the US District Court suppressed evidence of child pornography on a hard drive because proper warrants were not obtained before imaging the hard drive and calculating MD5 hash values for the individual files on the drive, some of which ended up matching known MD5 hash values for known child pornography image and video files. More details at Kerr's posting." Update: 10/28 16:23 GMT by T : Headline updated to reflect that this is a Federal District Court located in Pennsylvania, rather than a court of the Commonwealth itself.

Comments

Re:That's a terrible argument

[theaveng]

"[The government] has erected a multitude of new offices by a self-assumed power, & sent hither swarms of officers to harrass our people;" - Declaration of Independence, 1776

BTW:

I have a bomb in basement. Any police force who enters my home with warrant (or probable cause) is fine with me. No objections. But if they enter without warrant, then the rules change. I'm just one person and powerless to stop them, even when they are committing an illegal unConstitutional act. However the remote-controlled bomb will take care of them quite readily. BOOM. The message will be clear to police forces everywhere - don't violate the Supreme Law of the Land.

I'm just joking of course.

Re:It's good to see.

[Shadow Wrought]

Well, to my mind, they are still fellow human beings and fellow citizens who deserve every moral and legal right as to the rest of us

Yep. That's why I said that in my post. "And once the standard is set, the State will follow it and act accordingly." and "But it still has to remain within the bounds of our laws, the core of which is the Constitution."

I would shed a tear for each such measure as yet another branch was torn from the tree of liberty. I would mourn the needless waste of human life.

Molesting children and then distributing pictures of the same is not something which I would list under "Liberty." I guess I see their decision to act that way as using their life to harm others instead of help others. I guess I'm missing how you find such behavior to be a valuable contribution to society.

People like you and others in this thread who would rather join a rabid mob than go against one and stand up for what is right.

I consider Justice against those who prey on children to be the right thing to do. I'm not sure what exactly it is you have against that. Are you saying that child pornography should be legal? Is that what you are trying to imply? If so than I would vigorously disagree.

You, and every poster in this thread panders to hysteria by sycophantically declaring your own inflated revulsion at these crimes. Every time you do so, you further strengthen the forces that are eating away at the foundations of law and freedom in the western world. No reasonable person need declare their revulsion for these crimes. Yet everyone insists on doing so, loudly and explicitly at the earliest opportunity.

So by stating that the laws need to be followed in prosecuting these crimes I'm weakening them? And to whom am I a sycophant? The "Mob?" Maybe its not that we're a mob, maybe its that we as a sociaety recognize teh crime for what it is and the impact that it has on the victims. Are you saying that reasonable people don't need to say they are revulsed because everyone already feels it, or that a "reasonable" person wouldn't be revulsed?

The west has submitted to the howls, intimidation and demagoguery of the Outrage Brigade. We will suffer whatever injustice or wrong they now choose to impose upon us, and it seems, will do so indefinitely. Please read the rest of the Douglass quote, and think next time before you obediently proclaim your moral standing.

Prosecuting people, in accordance with the laws, even when the crime is particularly heinous to us, demonstrates our strength as a society. Regardless of my revulsion of the crime, the defendant does have their rights and they need to be respected- as I said previously. I think the punishment for crimes against children, the emotional scars of which they will likely carry for a lifetime, should be graver. That doesn't equate to lessening constitutional protections or making an exception. It means that we are more aware of the affects on the victim of the act and are modifying the punishment accordingly.

Frankly, it sounds like you are doing exactly what you think everyone else is, and raging against a perceived threat which frankly, I'm against and clearly stated a such; but which you are tirading against with an over-the-top response.

Re:It's good to see.

[Shadow Wrought]

I'll try again. What is it that is RIGHT ? I think prosecuting people who prey on children, under the law, with all the protections of the Constitution and Due Process is the right thing to do. What you wrote, to me, implied that that is NOT the right thing to do. That is a societal over-reaction. That we are mindless herd driven by fear. So, all I'm asking for, is what you think is the RIGHT thing to do with people who sexual prey on children?

You don't think my idea is right, that's fine. But simply saying "You're wrong," isn't very helpful. If you have a better idea, that would be great. At the end of the day we may very disagree, but isn't that just as important to a healthy society? That people can disagree?