DOJ Pushes to Expand Hacking Abilities Against Cyber-Criminals

Advocatus Diaboli writes with news about the DOJ's push to make it easier to get warrants to hack suspected cyber-criminals. "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."

Comments

Well SURE!

[rmdingler]

There's no need to protect the freedoms of a future investigative target if it is even slightly inconvenient for law enforcement.

After all, they're out there serving and protecting, right?

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear arguments are becoming more painful than a toothache.

Re:Well SURE!

[ShanghaiBill]

These changes seem reasonable to me. They are getting a warrant with judicial oversight. That is the way the system is supposed to work. If they have probable cause, then there is no reason that I can see for the warrant to specifically tie the search to a geographical location, or to require separate warrants for each machine. Car analogy: Should a search warrant for a vehicle specify that it can only be searched at the suspect's home, but not at his place of work? Should separate warrants be required for the glove compartment and trunk?

Re:Well SURE!

[CanHasDIY]

These changes seem reasonable to me. They are getting a warrant with judicial oversight. That is the way the system is supposed to work.

No, this is how it's supposed to work:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Mind you, per the Constitution nothing can supersede this rule, outside a legally ratified Constitutional Amendment.

If they have probable cause, then there is no reason that I can see for the warrant to specifically tie the search to a geographical location, or to require separate warrants for each machine.

Really? What part of "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" is unclear?

Car analogy: Should a search warrant for a vehicle specify that it can only be searched at the suspect's home, but not at his place of work? Should separate warrants be required for the glove compartment and trunk?

Separate warrants are required for locked compartments.

So yes to the second question.

Plant the evidence...

[cronostitan]

This will make it very easy to implicate *anyone* in a cybercrime by just planting the evidence on their computer/device as you are hacking it anyway.
Totalitarians, here we come!

Honeypot their "attack"

[stiggle]

So if you were targeted by the "law enforcement" and you Honeypoted their hacking attempt would they then come at you for interfering with their investigation?

This will be used against everyone

[stewsters]

If you give an agency the ability to hack, they will want to hack all US citizens. See the NSA for a recent example.

Letting the FBI change things on computers of people it is investigating is a recipe for disaster. How long before they too get a general warrant that allows them to hack any computer in the world? Remember, these are just people suspected, not people found guilty. If you don't think they could get that warrant, then you have not been following the NSA revelations closely enough.

What can they not get from the average criminal by just confiscating his computer when they arrest him? With the ability to upload and download files to people's computers, they will be able to blackmail anyone they want. If they want to eliminate a senator who is trying to cut their funds, they just hack into his computer, make some racist/sexist comments on his twitter account, and he wont be re-elected. Or they could add evidence of other activities, that even if no one can prove, would still would destroy them politically.

Good luck

[ArcadeMan]

My computer isn't even physically connected to the Internet. I use wi-fi!