Yes, read the full ruling and your comment when it was posted. I do not see a conflict with what was said and what my statements. Meaning currently say there a

Yes, read the full ruling and your comment when it was posted. I do not see a conflict with what was said and what my statements. Meaning currently say there are 5000 devices in NYC the FBI is already legally allowed to hack into them and remotely copy all the contents of those files without due process or notice to the owners? ________ EDIT(Re: "General warrants" comment below) Just to be clear, me reading of your comment is that "general warrants" that allow the FBI to download the contents of any computer that's in a botnet within the jurisdiction of the warrant provided is legal and the owner is not required to be notified unless that owner happens to be the defendant in the filing. Further, unless that warrant is later proven illegal, owner is legally accountable for the contents of the computer unless they're able to prove that they are not the party responsible for in illegal activities "discovered" in the process.