4 ms·
> Some documents indicate the OSINT officers take what appears to be a broad and overly-permissive attitude when collecting logs, sometimes scooping up content
by deogeo 7y ago
> Some documents indicate the OSINT officers take what appears to be a broad and overly-permissive attitude when collecting logs, sometimes scooping up content from individuals who may have no clear relationship to the violence at all.
This is public information, and very useful to figure out who to interview after a shooting to learn more about the crime and victim. Saving more data instead of less, just in case, seems sensible, and not overly-permissive at all.
- danso 7y ago> Saving more data instead of less, just in case, seems sensible, and not overly-permissive at all. Sloppy cache-invalidation of data has led to huge problems for public life, even when it comes to actual criminal records and arrest records [0]. You have no issue with someone's non-criminal social data being gathered under broad search terms, stored for an indefinite amount of time, and associated with your identity without your knowledge by a law enforcement agency? [0] https://bangordailynews.com/2011/12/16/news/nation/when-your-criminal-past-isnt-yours-background-check-errors-have-devastating-consequences/ https://bangordailynews.com/2011/12/16/news/nation/when-your... https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/haunted-by-the-past-a-criminal-record-shouldnt-ruin-a-career/388138/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/haunted...
- deogeo 7y agoSure I have issues - but these are murder investigations. Keeping track of who might be associated with the victim is the bare minimum of investigating. Giving this data to others as part of a background check is a whole different matter. That involves the police making an official statement about you. Of course that should ideally involve a lot more due diligence to make sure the information is correct, and limits on what they can share.