
With Rule 41, Committee Proposes to Grant New Hacking Powers to the Government - dineshp2
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/rule-41-little-known-committee-proposes-grant-new-hacking-powers-government
======
tzs
The EFF would be more effective if they suggested alternatives to things they
do not like, instead of just laying out doom and gloom scenarios that depend
on pessimistic (and often unrealistic) readings of bills, rules, and so on and
then saying we must defeat the thing.

I would like to see how they would suggest addressing the problem that this
rule change is meant to address:

1\. Bad guy, B, is conducting felony F in district D.

2\. B uses a computer, C, as part of this.

3\. B is hiding the location of C using technological means. C may or may not
be in D.

4\. Law enforcement has enough evidence to satisfy the 4th Amendment
requirements and get a warrant to search C remotely, but since they do not
know where C is actually located, they don't know _which_ court is the proper
court to issue that warrant.

This proposed change makes it so that a judge in D could issue the warrant
allowing a remote search of C, regardless of whether or not C is actually in
D.

~~~
deepnet
This is not a matter of the EFF 'not liking', rather the EFF fears this is
overly broad and ripe for abuse.

Not only is rule 41 potential overreach but it is enacted by the backdoor
avoiding Congressional oversight.

Your list is too short, the EFF reason well. One could add:

5\. They have copies of everything sent over the wire, so they have the
contents of C at NSA H.Q. already. Just get a warrant to look at it there.

6\. They already have access to all B's meta-data.

7\. Conversly E commits a crime using his memory.

8\. Or F commits a crime using a pen and paper, which he then hides at a
remote location.

This new power purports to address a non-existent problem.

Snowden argues the FBI had the meta-data for the Apple phone, thus they
already knew what was on it. So, again, why the big show about cracking it ?
[1]

Locative privacy is essential for journalism and many human rights - and
malicious actors could gain access to the hacking malware.

For my money the EFF argue with great caution, care and reason and actively
defend civil rights against overreach.

[1] From Snowden in debate with Chomsky & Greenwald:
[https://theintercept.com/2016/03/30/edward-snowden-noam-
chom...](https://theintercept.com/2016/03/30/edward-snowden-noam-chomsky-
glenn-greenwald-a-conversation-on-privacy/)

~~~
tzs
> Not only is rule 41 potential overreach but it is enacted by the backdoor
> avoiding Congressional oversight.

That's wrong. It's being enacted by the same procedure that is used for all of
the rules of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, as specified by Congress
in the Rules Enabling Act, which includes Congressional oversight. After the
Supreme Court approves a proposed rule change, there is a delay to allow
Congress to say no if they wish.

> 5\. They have copies of everything sent over the wire, so they have the
> contents of C at NSA H.Q. already. Just get a warrant to look at it there.

You are greatly overestimating what the NSA has. They don't have everything
that goes over the internet, and much of what they do intercept is encrypted
with methods that they are not known to be able to defeat.

~~~
deepnet
I accept Congress can disavow this before December the 1st, hence the EFF's
call to action - but the article does state this is a new & overreaching use
of this procedure.

 _" By law, the rules and proposals are supposed to be procedural and must not
change substantive rights. But the amendment to Rule 41 isn’t procedural at
all. It creates new avenues for government hacking that were never approved by
Congress."_

> overestimating what the NSA has.

The secret rooms at AT&T, like 641A that Mark Klein whistleblew in 2006,
suggests they had the potential for universal domestic collection capability
of everything domestic since 2003.

Other Five Eyes may have similar hardwired intercepts abroad. Snowden's
XKeyscore slide shows collection of 'nearly everything a user does online'[1].

Otherwise I agree that encryption exists that the NSA is not known to be able
to defeat with the caveat that courts can currently order decryption and jail
those in contempt.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-
secret-...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-
program-online-data)

