Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Ask Federal Court To Unseal Years of Surveillance Records (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Two lawyers and legal researchers based at Stanford University have formally asked a federal court in San Francisco to unseal numerous records of surveillance-related cases, as a way to better understand how authorities seek such powers from judges. This courthouse is responsible for the entire Northern District of California, which includes the region where tech companies such as Twitter, Apple, and Google, are based. According to the petition, Jennifer Granick and Riana Pfefferkorn were partly inspired by a number of high-profile privacy cases that have unfolded in recent years, ranging from Lavabit to Apple's battle with the Department of Justice. In their 45-page petition, they specifically say that they don't need all sealed surveillance records, simply those that should have been unsealed -- which, unfortunately, doesn't always happen automatically. The researchers wrote in their Wednesday filing: "Most surveillance orders are sealed, however. Therefore, the public does not have a strong understanding of what technical assistance courts may order private entities to provide to law enforcement. There are at least 70 cases, many under seal, in which courts have mandated that Apple and Google unlock mobile phones and potentially many more. The Lavabit district court may not be the only court to have ordered companies to turn over private encryption keys to law enforcement based on novel interpretations of law. Courts today may be granting orders forcing private companies to turn on microphones or cameras in cars, laptops, mobile phones, smart TVs, or other audio- and video-enabled Internet-connected devices in order to conduct wiretapping or visual surveillance. This pervasive sealing cripples public discussion of whether these judicial orders are lawful and appropriate."
No it's Trumps fault, let's blame him.
good.
This pervasive sealing cripples public discussion of whether these judicial orders are lawful and appropriate.
Well of course it does. This is because they know very well that the orders are neither lawful nor appropriate. Furthermore they consider their ability to continue undermining national security a process that is vital to national security. So in order to maintain security, they must keep violating our security and must not allow public discourse to reach an informed consensus about what even constitutes security.
*sigh*
And that's not even touching on the privacy issues. Does anyone actually even need this shit unsealed to see the blatantly obvious logical flaw in the reasoning behind it being sealed in the first place?
or maybe a Hillary to far to climb? it's Friday and that's all i've got.
This pervasive sealing cripples public discussion of whether these judicial orders are lawful and appropriate.
Well of course it does. This is because they know very well that the orders are neither lawful nor appropriate...
It is impossible to determine that without actually reading (1) the orders (2) the information presented when they were requested, and (3) a substantial body of case law. And even then, there is still a chance we would need to make arguments in court and let a judge who has also done those things make a decision after we help them sort through the issues.
Just because we don't like the idea or it's a TERRIBLE idea from a security POV doesn't mean it's illegal.
Real lawyers write in C++
I could see a good amount of prosecutors claiming unemployment benefits if half the shit that was sealed became public. Funny how society at large thinks that lawyers should be at the bottom of the ocean when prosecutors are fucking sleaze. Who cares though right? Get a conviction at any cost no matter what live is at stake. Innocence means a whole lot of dick. Just get the conviction and let someone rot out of the public eye. You're telling me no one in the FBI knew anything about innocent people being in jail in 2014? Give me a fucking break. $$$ controls everything. Sleep tight guys!
orders forcing private companies to turn on microphones or cameras in cars, laptops, mobile phones, smart TVs, or other audio- and video-enabled Internet-connected devices in order to conduct wiretapping or visual surveillance.
When used beyond warrant-enabled specifically-targeted ways based on reasonable suspicion, this is a gross violation of the 4th amendment.
However, the problem lies not just with the govt abusing it. It also lies with the teeming masses who not only make these devices succeed in the market, but do so to an extent that begins to push all other choices OUT of the market. Society is re-forming itself in the shape of a surveillance state, and it's not being forced down people's throats at gunpoint, it's being asked for.
You are angry that govt collected lots of information you. Now they want everyone to have access to that information?
In the land of the FREE, and home of the BRAVE...j/k you know you're not either anymore.
Some lawyers and researchers at Stanford still think that the USA is a democracy which follows the rule of law, especially for its surveillance apparatus and unaccountable agencies (CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, ...).
I do hope that no one bursts their bubble, it would be like telling small children that there is no Santa.
Moran.
People are buying electronic devices for their entertainment and convenience, not so the government can illegally spy on them. And people shouldn't have to become luddites in order for the government not to violate their basic rights.