It's unfortunate that they have chosen an interpretation base on any current or future need. That wildcard approach means that pretty much everything qualifies.

It's unfortunate that they have chosen an interpretation base on any current or future need. That wildcard approach means that pretty much everything qualifies. The law should restrict things to "any current specific known need". Need should be singular and said need must be related to a specific issue or case already under investigation or surveillance. Any language more loose than that leaves open far too much room for interpretation. They should literally maintain a list of targets they want to infiltrate and that list of targets needs to be open to being audited at some point in the future shortly after the related mission for a target is complete. They should not be allow to apply the vulnerability to any new target identified after the date upon which vulnerability was discovered. These countermeasures would go a long way to prevent abuse since they can't now look at it as a weapon in their arsenal to exploit as they see fit for any future mission.