Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 198 posts

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#131

Post by jeffbee »

perl4ever wrote: post #126
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, this appears to be a relatively new power. https://www.propublica.org/article/remember-when-the-patriot...

Wasn't there a fuss about Robert Bork (Supreme Court nominee) having his video rental records disclosed? Long before the Patriot Act.

Yes but again, please don't conflate these two unrelated topics. Bork's video rental records were voluntarily disclosed by a video rental shop to a newspaper reporter. A person has no particular constitutional right to privacy in such matters. This was Bork's own opinion on the matter! Later, Congress passed a law making such records private.

But that's all neither here nor there. We're discussing a court order. No law prevents a court from ordering the disclosure of video rental records, even today with the Video Privacy Protection Act, because the VPPA allows disclosure "to a law enforcement agency pursuant to a warrant issued under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure". Because that's what courts do. There's really nothing that is protected from court orders in the US, except for a few well-known, very narrow exemptions.

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#132

Post by derekja »

repiret wrote: post #130
withinboredom wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said “specific” book, which I take to mean “we found this book at a crime scene, can you tell us who checked it out?” Not, “I want to know everyone who checked out war and peace this year.” But after thinking about it, I think they meant the former and you meant the latter. But to the library, it’s the exact same thing. A library doesn’t (traditionally) track each and every book, so if it’s a popular book, it co…

Libraries track books individually. If you and I each check out a copy of War and Peace, and you turn yours in on time but I don’t, they know who to pester. I think there’s a continuum from the cops being able to say “we found this here book at a crime scene, who had it checked out?”, which should clearly be allowed, to “the security footage shows a copy of War and Peace with the libraries sticker on it in the crooks…

I hope you forgot a “not” in your last example!

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#133

Post by somebodythere »

BobbyJo wrote: post #102
stickfigure wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courts in the US are generally quite independent of the political process. Abuse of the court system is prosecuted fairly heavily. This is "rule of law". On the other hand, courts in China do whatever the CCP tells them. These are not equivalent.

Also, on a technical level, let's not equate a government apparatus that both controls and records anything and everything you do online, with a government asking a private company to identify people who searched the name of a girl who was murdered.

The China surveillance apparatus is based on compulsion of private companies. Where are you drawing the distinction?

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#134

Post by framecowbird »

perl4ever wrote: post #125
ALittleLight wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the library warranty thing depends. If the government wants to find out who checked out the Communist Manifesto so they can jail them for thought crime - that's bad. If the police want to know who checked out this specific copy of Harry Potter because they found it at the scene of a murder, that's good. Sure, I might've just dropped my copy of Harry Potter near a murder as I innocently passed by. And yeah, I…

There's an in between situation where someone is looking for correlations with a crime, but they are simply searching so much data, that they inevitably get a huge number of very close, but invalid matches. This tends to be a problem more and more with ever increasing databases that are convenient to access. People have intuitions for coincidences that are not appropriate for vast amounts of data.

This is a really great insight, and demonstrates where the "library book" example is lacking.

Since Google is so vast, I can find a page of search hits to support any particular belief I might have, no matter how wild.

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#135

Post by nullc »

wongarsu wrote: post #3

In principle I don't have a problem with the police getting a warrant to find out who searched for a specific name or place in a constrained time frame. It's a bit like the police asking the library who checked out a specific book. The problem is that this could obviously be used with keywords that target a wide group of people, e.g. finding everyone who plans to attend a protest. If we continue to allow keyword warr…

> It's a bit like the police asking the library who checked out a specific book.

After the patriot act was passed enabling the government to seek this kind of information my local library changed their records policy to not retain information on who checked out books after they were returned (or at least only for a strictly limited time after), as well as a host of other pieces of data-minimization. My library also put up signs explaining how to use the library most privately (e.g. that if you visit and read books on-site no one will ever collect your name or other personal information).

I understand many other libraries did as well and that the ALA promoted such changes.

Access to your library history is a violation of your mental privacy. Imagine you found yourself questioning your sexuality, -- you might check out books on the subject. A few years later a repressive regime could come into power and you might find our that your inquisitiveness a few years back placed you under enhanced scrutiny.

Because the access to search is even more casual the invasion is even more severe. And unlike your local library Google is MUCH less likely to consider your personal freedom a big priority.

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#137

Post by ur-whale »

wongarsu wrote: post #3

In principle I don't have a problem with the police getting a warrant to find out who searched for a specific name or place in a constrained time frame. It's a bit like the police asking the library who checked out a specific book. The problem is that this could obviously be used with keywords that target a wide group of people, e.g. finding everyone who plans to attend a protest. If we continue to allow keyword warr…

> In principle I don't have a problem with the police getting a warrant to find out who searched for a specific name or place

Wow. So, people like you actually do exist. This is both scary and sad.

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#138

Post by TeeMassive »

wongarsu wrote: post #3

In principle I don't have a problem with the police getting a warrant to find out who searched for a specific name or place in a constrained time frame. It's a bit like the police asking the library who checked out a specific book. The problem is that this could obviously be used with keywords that target a wide group of people, e.g. finding everyone who plans to attend a protest. If we continue to allow keyword warr…

>It's a bit like the police asking the library who checked out a specific book.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/05/nsa-surveillan...

https://slate.com/technology/2015/06/usa-freedom-act-before-...

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#139

Post by P_I_Staker »

pugworthy wrote: post #54
goalieca wrote: post #8

DuckDuckGo famously does not save your search history but the way things are going I fear that one day such a thing will be mandated.

And ProtonMail never keeps (er, kept) IP logs. You can trust them if you want, but really can you trust any company now days?

You were never able to trust companies.

Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users

#140

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

As sad as it is to admit it, it is not surprising to me. Worse, given the nature of my job, it is almost a given that some of my searches and queries are a part of an undesirable list somewhere. It is a problem. I am not trying to diminish it.

But the real problem is that general population has zero to no issue with it. They barely comprehend the scope of what is happening. I am not sure it registers at all. Last time I talked to my wife about it, she said she has nothing to hide and I had to resist the urge to just plop her internet history open to make it a teachable moment. I had this conversation once before. It is not fun and I don't want a repeat.

Post reply on HN