Slashdot Mirror
FBI Paid Geek Squad Repair Staff As Informants (zdnet.com)
According to newly released documents by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, federal agents would pay Geek Squad employees to flag illegal materials on devices sent in by customers for repairs. "The relationship goes back at least ten years, according to documents released as a result of the lawsuit [filed last year]," reports ZDNet. "The agency's Louisville division aim was to maintain a 'close liaison' with Geek Squad management to 'glean case initiations and to support the division's Computer Intrusion and Cyber Crime programs.'" From the report: According to the EFF's analysis of the documents, FBI agents would "show up, review the images or video and determine whether they believe they are illegal content" and seize the device so an additional analysis could be carried out at a local FBI field office. That's when, in some cases, agents would try to obtain a search warrant to justify the access. The EFF's lawsuit was filed in response to a report that a Geek Squad employee was used as an informant by the FBI in the prosecution of child pornography case. The documents show that the FBI would regularly use Geek Squad employees as confidential human sources -- the agency's term for informants -- by taking calls from employees when they found something suspect.
Does this mean there is no such thing as "geek squad - client privilege"? I'm pretty sure you can expect to see me drunk on CNN tomorrow, talking about how I'm not going to comply with a grand jury subpoena in this witch hunt. In fact, I'm going to start drinking now so I'm ready. What kind of liquor goes best with antidepressants and chicken wings?
You are welcome on my lawn.
You love to say "I told you so..." ~ Georgia Lass, Dead Like Me
Yeah, I kinda do, don't I? Anyone taking something like that to someplace like that and assumes their shit isn't being combed through either by someone looking for jackoff material, or worse, something to rat you out to the feds for, is a goddamned fucking moron. (Damn, what is up with my LANGUAGE lately, huh?!? Oh, shit... I have "SAILOR-MODE" set to "enabled".... That explains it. SHIT... I can't fucking disable it! What the fuck! I'm supposed to sing in my church's choir this Sunday! What the fuck am I going to DO?!?!) ^o^
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
I could have sworn that I read about this at least 5 years ago, maybe more. Isn't this rather old news?
eleven plus two / twelve plus one
What kind of liquor goes best with antidepressants and chicken wings?
What kind of wings? Regular wings, or buffalo wings?
The correct answer, of course, is always Rocket Fuel Malt Liquor, DAMN! but it pays to be specific, you might want Rocket Fuel Malt Liquor with a Lemon Twist, DAMN! for buffalo wings.
The issue is that to some people it looks like illegal search and seizure. It looks that way to them because Geek Squad employees were getting paid by law enforcement and law enforcement was writing up warrants after the fact. And argument could be made that because money was being exchanged for services, it's no longer a case of private citizens reporting illegal behavior to appropriate channels but an effective arm of law enforcement being paid to go fishing for evidence without going through a judge first.
Does it hold water? Probably not. I'll add that in many cases, private citizens are required by law to report some of this stuff. Teachers in both private and public schools, physicians at private practices, and the like are required to report child abuse and child pornography. I believe (and someone who knows better please correct me if I'm wrong) patient-doctor confidentiality is waived in case of child abuse or pornography as well.
We did this last year it seems:
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
and
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
But hey, it's still interesting
...omphaloskepsis often...
And that, my friends, is why I've never brought my kitty-porn-laden computers into Geek Squad for service! Well, that, and the fact that they know a lot less about computers than I do!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I'm still waiting for the criminal indictments for the mandatory reporters at MSU for the women's gymnastics scandal. I believe that Michigan's mandatory reporting laws must cover people who had reason to suspect that something was not right with Larry Nassar.
So far, I haven't read anything about the people who should have reported Nassar being indicted. Why not?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
If you have to ask, then you're part of the problem.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The repair techs were being paid to actively search through the computers and report anything "suspicious".
There is a difference between a plumber coming to fix your john and stumbling across a heap of porn magazines under the sink, and the same guy being paid to ruffle through all unlocked cabinets and drawers in your house while you're not looking.
Not to mention that if they were being paid by incident, they would have an incentive to plant such material. That alone should scream "reasonable doubt" to any sensible juror.
The question is about the methods that information was obtained by.
If a police officer is not allowed to search your hard drive without at least a probable cause (and possibly a warrant), then they should not be allowed to pay somebody to do it for them.
Like the other guys said, it’s a 4th Amendment issue. The cops can’t just hire people to do their (otherwise illegal, constitutionally prohibited) searches for them. They should be trying to obey the Constitution and protect our rights, not trying to work around them.
It’s up to the courts whether this sort of workaround is permissible. Courts have to make very clear rules.
Unless Geek Squad is legally required to report what they find, and unless they disclose that they will be searching for contraband, it’s a clear breach of trust on Geek Squad's part. Some of Geek Squad's customers probably deserve to have their trust breached. But the FBI was paying Geek Squad, so Geek Squad had a direct, corrupt incentive to breach every customer's trust.
"private citizens are required by law to report some of this stuff"
Please cite the specific federal law(s) you are referring to. "Private citizens", in general, are under no such obligation.
And yes, these claims do "hold water", though you are likely to lose one way or another if you test them. Might doesn't make right.
Another, possibly bigger, issue is that you've now given geek squad members incentive to plant evidence in exchange for cash.
How do you prove chain of custody in these cases? How much do you trust that near minimum wage "tech" from best buy who now gets paid every time he "finds" something on a computer?
Everyone who interacted with them. Every voluntary interaction between people has an inherent level of trust.
Geek Squad betrayed their customers in a corrupt way by taking money in exchange for reporting on the results of searched computers. If they just stumble on some shit and report it because they feel they have a duty to protect children or something, that's different because it’s an act of conscience. Geek Squad sold their customers out for cash (cf. Judas).
Who knows. Jerry Sandusky brought down a whole lot of people at Penn State and the university president lost his job and got a misdemeanor conviction. Took a while for it all to percolate up to the top.
The government can't search your stuff without a warrant.
"The government" meaning, of course, people working for the government. It's unconstitutional for people working for the government, or on the government's behalf, to randomly search through your stuff.
Digging through YOUR stuff. They didn't find the CP by searching computers marked "this computer contains CP", they looked through everybody's pictures hoping to find something good, either CP or something that they enjoyed seeing.
Because the FBI was PAYING them, they are working on the government's behalf. The Fourth Amendment applies when the government pays people to do searches for them.
Easy. Mens rea does not apply to possession of child pornography. Simply possessing it is a crime, whether you knew about it or not, whether someone planted the evidence or not. If the technician will testify that he found it on the computer owned by the defendant, then that person is going to jail for a long time and will be a sex offender for life even if that child pornography was not on his computer until he handed it to Geek Squad.
This is what you get when Congress passes "think of the children" laws. Who is going to complain about tightening the screws on people who have child porn? Nobody - even if there is collateral legal damage.
And were they paid to install FBI backdoors too ? And Americans think they are better than China... maybe they are but each passing day the gap closes.
The person would not be in possession of it until the computer is returned to them, which is unlikely to happen as the FBI take it for evidence.
That said, proving your innocence is near impossible, and make no mistake, this is guilty until proven innocent, not the other way around. And even if you do manage to prove innocence, your life will still be ruined.
But "think of the children" indeed.
It's still corrupt to do it for cash. And still a breach of trust. The written policy may help protect them from legal recourse.
Yes, it was shameful the way we rioted in the streets when Obama was elected and beat up homeless people because the supported him.
Hahaha no. If this were the case there would be no FBI in the appropriate department to investigate because they all would be in jail for possession. Along with them would be Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Drop Box, and any other cloud provider. Stop spreading FUD. All child porn laws in the US require proof that the defendant "knowingly viewed or possessed".
State v Jensen, 173 P.3d 1046 (Ariz.App. 2008)
Barton v State, 648 S.E.2d 660 (Ga.App. 2007)
United States v Lacy, 119 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 1997)
"trial court erred in not instructing that the defendant must know that the hard drive and disks contained child pornography to be guilty of possession of pornography"
chain of evidence issues would really mess this up + in court best buy would have to say how there network is setup give out there inside procedures without any of the top secret BS also need to talk about the overseas remote support
"What kind of wings? Regular wings, or buffalo wings?"
Special order. Only right wings.
Your friend should be charged with computer crimes, preferably one per picture and rot in a cell for a very very long time. This is a gross abuse of trust, which is why I blame the techs for this incident, not the FBI... it's no secret the FBI will 'work with' criminals to catch other criminals. So I don't really blame them, they just saw some low hanging fruit and pounced. The techs who root around customers computers are the dirty ones who make us all look bad and untruthworthy.
We need HIPAA laws regarding comptuer/smartphone repair shops.
Eons ago, when I was young, people had to take pictures on "film" that they had to take in to a drugstore for "developing." Employees at these places were under similar orders to watch for child porn in the pictures they processed. Some spotty high schooler at Walgreens therefore had an actionable first opinion on whether or not those snapshots of your one-year-old in the bathtub constituted child porn. People would occasionally get hauled in for embarrassing interview sessions before being able to clear their names.
When it comes to computer files, that's just one obvious line of inquiry. What if Geek Squad Guy sees he thinks is a double sets of tax files, or "hacker scripts" or a menu from a marijuana store in the legalized next state over?
I work in education. We signed a statement, as part of our training, that holds us legally liable to report child abuse, child pornography, etc. we can be sued/fired if it occurs, we knew about it, and didn't report it. It's a California State Law, however, not federal
I think the point is, there are people outside law enforcement who are required to report certain things. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/a...