5 ms·
I don't agree with the "search without a warrant" part, because it sounds like they specifically were going after this doctor, when they were just looking for w
by akjainaj 10y ago
I don't agree with the "search without a warrant" part, because it sounds like they specifically were going after this doctor, when they were just looking for whatever they could find in any consumer drive to report it.
There is also no proof that this technician was looking into unallocated sectors of the drive just to find something to incriminate customers, since looking into unallocated sectors is standard practice to recover missing files.
- h_r 10y agoIn the absence of proof of exactly how they are searching, the troubling aspect to me is the financial incentives being offered to low paid employees to somehow find criminal material. I have no trouble imagining unethical workers even going as far as planting material because "baby needs a new pair of shoes" or the FBI will pay extra to bust some juicy target.
- throwaway729 10y ago> because it sounds like they specifically were going after this doctor, when they were just looking for whatever they could find in any consumer drive to report it. Walking into every house on a street or in a city and searching it for drugs is still a highly illegal search. Whether or not a specific person was targeted is entirely beside the point.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoWalking into a house when the owner says "Please walk into my house and look for my lost stuff. I'll pay you" changes the equation, right?
- pavel_lishin 10y agoNot if the owner says "Walk into my house and fix my boiler", and you start digging through his underwear drawer.