Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

theintercept.com

321–330 of 386 posts

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A search involves compulsion. Exclusively? That's a novel interpretation of 4A. Where did you get it?

I get the impression that a majority of the commenters here are (somehow) not aware that there is a deep body of legal precedent interpreting 4A.

> there is a deep body of legal precedent interpreting 4A

I don't think there's any landmark decision contrary to the interpretation of 4A that I'm putting forth.

As it stands now, the interpretation I am putting forth is the one the government abides by - it can buy data from brokers without warrant if there is no compulsion.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fourth amendment doesn't address the case where people voluntarily provide information to a third party which contracts with the government to pass it on. It's indicative of the attitude we should have in the matter, but it's not basis enough for a legitimate Supreme Court opinion — not that that will prevent one being given, mind you. There really does need to be a law preventing government from contracting with…

How is this not different from asking a phone company for the transcript of a private conversation? Or of asking a bank for account statements? It is the nature of any sufficiently complex economy that private entities will possess extremely intimate knowledge about their customers, knowledge which their customers "voluntarily" provided in the course of business. None of this has any bearing whatsoever on the constra…

The difference is none of those things are freely available for purchase?

That’s the key here - these companies are already selling this information. The govt is just saying “cool, we’ll buy it too”.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have laws, though. The Fourth Amendment is a law, and it's reasonable to say that purchasing what is (arguably) the company's data is still tantamount to a search of our "effects". Or maybe it's not, and we need new legislation specifically targeting this. That's where the Supreme Court comes in: their raison d'être is to resolve ambiguities in existing law.

> The Fourth Amendment is a law, and it's reasonable to say that purchasing what is (arguably) the company's data is still tantamount to a search of our "effects". Got any precedents for this? All examples given in this thread was about the government forcing companies to hand over data, not companies just plain selling it to the government. These companies are already selling this data to other companies, like credi…

I don't. My point is just that the Supreme Court can set a precedent, so it's possible that if the case were brought to them they might decide that it's covered under the Fourth Amendment (or something similar) without needing additional legislation.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#324
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're doing it to ourselves. We're the ones who keep clicking "I agree", who keep feeding these companies. Of course they're going to look to make a profit off of your data, there's nothing stopping them because we willingly gave it up.

So your suggestion is for everyone to become digital hermits? Start sending snail mail invoices and writing checks again?

Vote with your money and buy from a competitor that sells the same product/service but privacy friendly.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#325
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I ask what is "dishonest" about what I wrote? It is my opinion and I am entitled to it (yet). And how did it "shut down a legitimate question"?

It’s such hyperbole that it’s difficult for anyone to believe that it isn’t simply a statement made in bad faith.

>"...difficult for anyone..."

Whole three of you sure qualifies for "anyone".

>"...statement made in bad faith..."

Labeling concerned users as Chinese agents is just that.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can the government buy an autobiography I wrote detailing my crimes to help their investigation? Or is that a 4th amendment violation?

The Gov can acquire data that you - with full willful consent - have chosen to make publicly available. eg: public social media posts.

Can the government use my ex-wife's autobiography detailing the crimes she saw me commit in order to help investigate me?

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the impression that a majority of the commenters here are (somehow) not aware that there is a deep body of legal precedent interpreting 4A.

> there is a deep body of legal precedent interpreting 4A I don't think there's any landmark decision contrary to the interpretation of 4A that I'm putting forth. As it stands now, the interpretation I am putting forth is the one the government abides by - it can buy data from brokers without warrant if there is no compulsion.

> I don't think there's any landmark decision contrary to the interpretation of 4A that I'm putting forth.

There are tons of case law that have interpreted 4A out to it's currently upheld boundaries - boundaries that aren't well represented by the original wording.

> the interpretation I am putting forth is the one the government abides by - it can buy data from brokers without warrant if there is no compulsion.

You can believe that if you choose. It is curious tho, why you feel a compulsion to keep roping compulsion into it.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Gov can acquire data that you - with full willful consent - have chosen to make publicly available. eg: public social media posts.

Can the government use my ex-wife's autobiography detailing the crimes she saw me commit in order to help investigate me?

Because search is the scope of our discussion, the answer is that the government can read your wife's book for the same reasons they can read your book.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd agree that the 4th Amendment ought to cover it. It isn't unambiguous, though. It isn't hard to see how a lawyer could point out that "and to forever secure the people, their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against all unreasonable searches and seizures under the guise of law" says nothing about purchasing data from a 3rd party. This wasn't really something that would have come up in the 18th century. Extend…

The federalist society which has hugely influential attorney and judicial membership believes in a textual interpretation of the constitution. They wouldn't go for a sensible modern reading but instead stick to gospel like dogma on how it was intended to be read 250 years ago I guess.

I could get behind an originalist reading of the copyright clause.

Re: The U.S. Treasury is buying private app data to target and investigate people

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a private company can buy the data why shouldn't the government be able to? The real solution is to not allow the data to be sold to anyone.

I'd go farther than that and say that such data shouldn't be collected in the first place.

There is a solution - individually act in a way to limit what is collected. Take charge of the tracking devices you own, and of your spend. For extra credit, seed with bad data or misdirection.

Statistically zero people make any effort, other than maybe saying the government should limit government data mining. Here is an idea, turn off mobile phone location tracking this weekend.

Post reply on HN