

A Small Rule Change That Could Give the US Government Sweeping New Warrant Power - sinak
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-small-rule-change-that-could-give-us.html?m=1

======
mkempe
I posted a related article a few weeks ago, which was throroughly mocked. [1]
The title of my submission was (then) changed to the rather innocuous-sounding
"U.S. judges propose updating warrants for Tor, remote searches". My
submission title indicated it was a massive loophole that the US government
wanted in order to undermine the current limits on their powers.

The ACLU and EFF have also expressed deep concern about theses changes. [2]
"The ACLU’s comments are particularly compelling as they provide technical
detail on how the rule change could play out and undermine substantive rights,
including the Fourth Amendment. For those of you who are concerned about how
using Tor, or other anonymizing proxies, could expose innocent bystanders,
please invest some time in reading their comments (see e.g., pp. 14-15 of the
ACLU’s comments). The discussion on ycombinator focuses on the text of the
rules as opposed to the potential impact in application of the proposed
change." [3]

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8918265](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8918265)

[2]
[http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/RulesAndPolicies/rules/2014...](http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/RulesAndPolicies/rules/2014-11-Criminal-
Public-Hearing-Testimony.pdf)

[3] [http://fee.org/freeman/detail/youll-never-guess-whos-
trying-...](http://fee.org/freeman/detail/youll-never-guess-whos-trying-to-
hack-your-iphone#comment-1808296013) (warning: signup popup)

