> This is the same rule change that says if you use a VPN or TOR you can legally be hacked by the FBI, yes? Emphatically no. This rule changes absolutely noth

> This is the same rule change that says if you use a VPN or TOR you can legally be hacked by the FBI, yes? Emphatically no. This rule changes absolutely nothing about what is required to get a warrant, including the specificity of it (must identify a specific computer and/or person - that doesn't change at all, so how they identify TOR, VPN, etc users is already enough and has been challenged up through the supreme court). Simply using concealment does not lower the bar or change the requirements for getting the actual warrant. The literal only thing that changes is if you are located in District 8 and commit a crime with a victim in district 4, if the FBI can show you are using technological means to hide your location - they may handle getting the exact same warrant they are already allowed to get with the same amount of evidence in the victims district instead of having to find yours. In the past, if you were concealing your location in a way that they filed in District 5, that evidence would have been subject to challenge due to improper venue. They are now saying that where the crime actually occurred is a valid place to get a warrant if they can also show you are using technological means to hide your location. Concealing your location isn't a crime and doesn't demonstrate that a search of a computer would uncover evidence of a crime (it's actually right there in Rule 41 (c)). It explicitly doesn't change what methods they are allowed to use - so everything they can do after this change, they were already allowed to do.