3 ms·
The point is, a warrant is a tiny bit more difficult to get than no warrant. Having all that data on their own site bypasses the need for one.
by mdpopescu 9y ago
The point is, a warrant is a tiny bit more difficult to get than no warrant. Having all that data on their own site bypasses the need for one.
- zbentley 9y agoTrue, but having all the data on the government's site may (may) make it more secure from being leaked to sources other than the government. This isn't a statement of the government's software quality, but one of incentives: large private companies have not, historically, suffered much (legally or in terms of growth/revenue) from data breaches. The government losing data that it has independent reasons to keep safe is probably a larger perceptual risks, since government departments/funding can be suddenly cut in the wake of disasters of this nature, and elections can be lost. TL;DR the feedback loop for bad security might be more direct if the government is the one doing the securing. That's a troublesome prospect in several regards, but is plausible, I think.