3 ms·

> The issue is that once we allow a state agency to trample the 4th amendment for an admittedly noble cause Can you expand on how they broke the 4th? There's n

• nitrogen 11y ago
  Hacking is sometimes compared to criminal trespass, so when the government does it it's fair to compare it to storming and searching a physical place, which is covered by the 4th.
  • joopxiv 11y ago
    Storming and searching a physical place happens all the time, with a warrant, which they had.
    • deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    • rbanffy 11y ago
      They had a very non-specific warrant, something not unlike automatically authorizing anyone who enters a given building to be tagged, followed, and have their homes searched covertly. Search warrants are not supposed to be that easy.
      • dhimes 11y ago
        From the article: Magistrate Judge Theresa C. Buchanan in the Eastern District of Virginia, who signed the warrant used for the NIT, did not respond to questions on whether she understood that the warrant would grant the power to hack anyone who signed up to Playpen, or whether she consulted technical experts before signing it, and her office said not to expect a reply. So we can't even be sure that a judge knows what she's doing when she's asked to sign a warrant like this. They don't have to prove competence.
• dllthomas 11y ago
  "[...] and no warrants shall issue, but [...] particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." My understanding has it that physical warrants cannot say "I'm going to search this building, and also any other buildings I find mentioned there."