The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that police officers usually need a warrant before they can search an arrested suspect’s cellphone.
The court said on a 9-0 vote that the right of police to search an arrested suspect at the scene without a warrant does not extend in most circumstances to data held on a cell phone.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/usa-court-mobilephone-idUSL1N0O21TG20140625
Personally, I think it’s a very sensible ruling.
It’s not misaligned with some similar search and seizure cases that have previously set precedents here, e.g., similar restrictions on searching locked boxes or trunks of vehicles, or even car interiors absent reasonable belief that evidence of a related crime may exist within the vehicle.
This is excellent.
How does this apply to NSA, CIA, FBI ?
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
How does this apply to NSA, CIA, FBI ?[/quote]
The real question.
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
This is excellent.
How does this apply to NSA, CIA, FBI ?[/quote]
It’s tough to say, but those are not the people you need to worry about so much compared to the random cop who pulls you over for speeding.
If the NSA, CIA, and FBI are after you, I would presume they would obtain a search warrant before they knock on your door, or knock it down.
I agree…
And I’m not someone who would be a target. However, it’s my understanding that texts and conversations are constantly monitored. Would this limit that?
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
I agree…
And I’m not someone who would be a target. However, it’s my understanding that texts and conversations are constantly monitored. Would this limit that?
[/quote]
Well, based on what the NSA says and iirc, their monitoring isn’t so much active monitoring but rather just running everything through some database with a search for some target keyword.
If the program finds something suspicious, then it’ll let someone know.
Sure, they’re monitoring you, but it’s completely different from a cop demanding that you show them your phone after they arrest you for public intoxication or something.
^ how
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity.
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data. [/quote]
It’s disturbing brother. All you need to do is look up the NSA Utah data center. It’s literally recording everything in and out of the country.
http://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/
You know our history. If we can do it, we will. People were concerned about the tech in their phones being used against them. Now, it seems perfectly normal for people to cover up the camera on their phones and pc’s. After finding out what happened to the German Chancellor, you really think our gov gives a shit about process for it’s own citizens? I don’t… 
Shared this a little while back. Mikko Hypponen: How the NSA betrayed the world's trust -- time to act | TED Talk
I think it’s reasonable.
But, for legitimate reasons, it doesn’t impact us too much.
Drug busts / take downs: just have warrants prepared when you take them into custody. Do your homework, if you have good intelligence, it’s not that big of a problem.
Or (and much more simple), seize the phone, turn it into evidence, then write the paper, get a judge to sign, your in. No biggie.
It just makes you articulate the reason to a judge. And it keeps patrol officers from going too far. If there is not a valid reason to access the phone (if someone is arrested for assault, DUI, etc.) there needs to be a clear and compelling reason to access their phone.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data. [/quote]
Correct. There have been reports in the media that NSA is already having huge difficulties with storage. It’s not possible nor useful to store every cell phone call and there is not enough manpower to go through them all. As already mentioned they use word recognition software to target communications that include key words like “bomb,” “martyr,” “Allah” etc. I imagine that if the NSA becomes a tool of the executive branch they will also search for words like “tea party,” “constitution,” “first amendment,” “second amendment,” “border control” and “liberty.” People who use words like that are the real threat to the Republicrats and crony capitalists.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
This is excellent.
How does this apply to NSA, CIA, FBI ?[/quote]
It’s tough to say, but those are not the people you need to worry about so much compared to the random cop who pulls you over for speeding.
If the NSA, CIA, and FBI are after you, I would presume they would obtain a search warrant before they knock on your door, or knock it down. [/quote]
Your presumption would be dead wrong. Not only would they not have to get a warrant for up to 5 years, but they can prevent any witnesses from speaking to anyone about it under the threat of criminal prosecution.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data. [/quote]
Correct. There have been reports in the media that NSA is already having huge difficulties with storage. It’s not possible nor useful to store every cell phone call and there is not enough manpower to go through them all. As already mentioned they use word recognition software to target communications that include key words like “bomb,” “martyr,” “Allah” etc. I imagine that if the NSA becomes a tool of the executive branch they will also search for words like “tea party,” “constitution,” “first amendment,” “second amendment,” “border control” and “liberty.” People who use words like that are the real threat to the Republicrats and crony capitalists.
[/quote]
It’s not exactly by keyword like that anymore. Ediscovery software tools mixed with custom algorithms for recognizing patterns around ideas are used as well.
In fact, there is a 100% serious effort to write AI-like software to recognize sarcasm in order to avoid false positives and such.
Generally speaking if you have a non-apple phone(apple can decrypt their own phones if requested to) and you encrypt it properly, there’s nothing anyone at any level commercial or government can do to access your data without your consent. As of now they can’t force your consent, but that is being challenged with mixed results as well.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data. [/quote]
Correct. There have been reports in the media that NSA is already having huge difficulties with storage. It’s not possible nor useful to store every cell phone call and there is not enough manpower to go through them all. As already mentioned they use word recognition software to target communications that include key words like “bomb,” “martyr,” “Allah” etc. I imagine that if the NSA becomes a tool of the executive branch they will also search for words like “tea party,” “constitution,” “first amendment,” “second amendment,” “border control” and “liberty.” People who use words like that are the real threat to the Republicrats and crony capitalists.
[/quote]
It’s not exactly by keyword like that anymore. Ediscovery software tools mixed with custom algorithms for recognizing patterns around ideas are used as well.
In fact, there is a 100% serious effort to write AI-like software to recognize sarcasm in order to avoid false positives and such.
Generally speaking if you have a non-apple phone(apple can decrypt their own phones if requested to) and you encrypt it properly, there’s nothing anyone at any level commercial or government can do to access your data without your consent. As of now they can’t force your consent, but that is being challenged with mixed results as well.[/quote]
How do you know they can’t decipher AES 256 bit encryption? That would be something intelligence cryptographers would definitely keep secret if they had the potential to do so.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The NSA and warrants? I think the warrant thing is a little misleading given almost every warrant asked for is issued, on top of the whole thing being private.
I get the feeling all of our cellphone data is being stored somewhere on some huge hard drives, just like all the rest of our internet activity. [/quote]
I’m no tech wizz, but that is a shit load of data. [/quote]
Correct. There have been reports in the media that NSA is already having huge difficulties with storage. It’s not possible nor useful to store every cell phone call and there is not enough manpower to go through them all. As already mentioned they use word recognition software to target communications that include key words like “bomb,” “martyr,” “Allah” etc. I imagine that if the NSA becomes a tool of the executive branch they will also search for words like “tea party,” “constitution,” “first amendment,” “second amendment,” “border control” and “liberty.” People who use words like that are the real threat to the Republicrats and crony capitalists.
[/quote]
It’s not exactly by keyword like that anymore. Ediscovery software tools mixed with custom algorithms for recognizing patterns around ideas are used as well.
In fact, there is a 100% serious effort to write AI-like software to recognize sarcasm in order to avoid false positives and such.
Generally speaking if you have a non-apple phone(apple can decrypt their own phones if requested to) and you encrypt it properly, there’s nothing anyone at any level commercial or government can do to access your data without your consent. As of now they can’t force your consent, but that is being challenged with mixed results as well.[/quote]
How do you know they can’t decipher AES 256 bit encryption? That would be something intelligence cryptographers would definitely keep secret if they had the potential to do so.[/quote]
They can decipher AES256 when the implementation has a backdoor of say 54 bits built in because they forced the company to produce one.
If you use your own implementation AES256 can’t be broken until quantum co-computing is a reality.
In general, people put too much into believing law enforcement can do something about recovering data that can’t be done commercially.
The difference between what can be done commercially and what can be done theoretically with unlimited resources is going from days to weeks at thousands to tens of thousands of dollars compared to years at tens of millions of dollars.
cough the backdoor stuff is mentioned on the Ted Talks link.
The gov intercepts everything that goes in and out of the country. Being so much traffic comes in and out of he country, and so much is microsoft based that’s a shitload of information we are already spending money on and keeping track of.
Really, we go through the effort of tracking everyone else in the world, why the hell wouldn’t we track our puny populace?
The question isn’t if we would. The question is if the could, would they… If they can, they will is my point.
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
This is excellent.
How does this apply to NSA, CIA, FBI ?[/quote]
The case wasn’t really targeted at those groups, but in reading further into it, it appears applicable on a “spot arrest” if they don’t have a warrant specifying that the cell phone can be searched too.
However, in 99% of the cases, this ruling is going to applicable to ordinary city, county or state LEOs in the execution of their daily duties, in the same manner that restrictions on searching contents of vehicles apply, for example, namely where unplanned arrests are concerned. Thus, the whole NSA/FBI/CIA discourse really isn’t pertinent to 99% of the cases that this ruling really applies to.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I imagine that if the NSA becomes a tool of the executive branch they will also search for words like “tea party,” “constitution,” “first amendment,” “second amendment,” “border control” and “liberty.” People who use words like that are the real threat [/quote]
If?
Lol, I’m pretty sure we are hear already man.