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

Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

dailymail.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 337 posts

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#201

Post by thaumasiotes »

jonas21 wrote: post #200
RattleyCooper wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at it this way, if a car is involved in a drive-by shooting the police can't get a warrant to search every single home that has the same year/make/model of car registered to with that address. For a legal warrant you have to have probable cause that a specific person committed a crime. You can't just search everybody and see what sticks, that's blatantly unconstitutional.

On the other hand, if a specific type of nail is used as shrapnel in a homemade bomb, investigators can go around to all hardware stores in the area and get security camera footage of customers who recently bought large quantities of that type of nail. This isn't a hypothetical situation - according to the LA Times, it's how they ended up cracking the Austin bombing case that involved the Google warrant [1]: > Trying…

The police can ask for anything. It's not the same thing as ordering something.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#202

Post by pcrh »

beermonster wrote: post #174
literallyaduck wrote: post #2

The only sensible solution is to name JS and CSS frameworks using the keyword list.

Reminds me when the trigger keywords for Echelon[1] leaked on the internet [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON [2] https://www.theregister.com/2001/05/31/what_are_those_words/

How useful is that list if it includes words like fish, cards, redhead, Texas, and so forth?

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#203

Post by jonas21 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #201
jonas21 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, if a specific type of nail is used as shrapnel in a homemade bomb, investigators can go around to all hardware stores in the area and get security camera footage of customers who recently bought large quantities of that type of nail. This isn't a hypothetical situation - according to the LA Times, it's how they ended up cracking the Austin bombing case that involved the Google warrant [1]: > Trying…

The police can ask for anything. It's not the same thing as ordering something.

That's a good point. The reason they had to get a warrant for Google is that Google refuses to hand over data unless they're compelled to do so (and I'm glad they're willing to take this stand). It's unclear whether there were any warrants for the hardware stores of if the stores simply gave up the data when asked.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#204

Post by rpmisms »

beermonster wrote: post #174
literallyaduck wrote: post #2

The only sensible solution is to name JS and CSS frameworks using the keyword list.

Reminds me when the trigger keywords for Echelon[1] leaked on the internet [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON [2] https://www.theregister.com/2001/05/31/what_are_those_words/

> Glock 26 - a ceramic handgun that can't be detected by airport scanners (a reader informs us that the Glock 26 is only partly ceramic, the bullets are metal and is can be detected at airports - so we should really shift this one into the X-file list)

They pulled this directly from "Die Hard", the Glock 26 is just a cut-down Glock 19, with a big fat metal slide being integral to the gun's functionality.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#205

Post by AlbertCory »

RattleyCooper wrote: post #103
AlbertCory wrote: post #60

I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I would bet SCOTUS rules this kind of warrant illegal. Google certainly has the resources to take the case that far. AFAIK a warrant usually is tied to a specific person or a specific crime. In other words, if an explosion killed Harry McHarryface, then it would be constitutional to ask for names of people who searched for Harry. Or if the fertilizer used in the bomb was shown to…

Look at it this way, if a car is involved in a drive-by shooting the police can't get a warrant to search every single home that has the same year/make/model of car registered to with that address. For a legal warrant you have to have probable cause that a specific person committed a crime. You can't just search everybody and see what sticks, that's blatantly unconstitutional.

There's actually a doormat you can order, which I saw hanging on the wall in Google Legal (I'm not saying that was an official statement by anyone):

Come back with a warrant

I'd get one, but I'm afraid someone would steal it.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#206

Post by passivate »

zamfi wrote: post #186
RattleyCooper wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at it this way, if a car is involved in a drive-by shooting the police can't get a warrant to search every single home that has the same year/make/model of car registered to with that address. For a legal warrant you have to have probable cause that a specific person committed a crime. You can't just search everybody and see what sticks, that's blatantly unconstitutional.

> For a legal warrant you have to have probable cause that a specific person committed a crime. You can't just search everybody and see what sticks, that's blatantly unconstitutional. Sure, though it’s worth noting that nothing prohibits the police from walking down the street and asking people. Those people don’t have to talk to the police, but… Google will fight warrants like this. AT&T doesn’t. Other companies hav…

>Google will fight warrants like this.

How many keyword-search warrants have they fought? The article seems to suggest google has been providing data to the us government in the past and that this is an on-going collaboration.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#207

Post by passivate »

xxpor wrote: post #43
mindslight wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government and Google are symbiotic entities. Why would this ever happen?

Not even close. This sort of rhetoric just numbs people to actual abuses when they happen. If you want to see actual symbiotic entities, go look at social media in China or American defense contractors.

"We're way better than China" is not really a great thing in this context. It is also a problem that the bar has been set too low by other countries.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#208

Post by Spivak »

rpmisms wrote: post #197
jahewson wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No this is Kavanaugh trying to have his cake and eat it by saying one thing and doing another. He ducked out of making a ruling and Biden forced him to do so. The court doesn’t get to make law by threatening to make law. They have to actually do it.

The court doesn't, or at least shouldn't, make law.

You're about 850 years too late on that front. Common Law has been a thing since Henry the Second and we just ggyG'd the whole UK legal system and edited from there.

You can't really avoid this either without throwing out judicial precedent because "knowing how the court will rule on subsequent cases" is basically the same as law.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#209

Post by snuser »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #18

It may be an unpopular opinion, but I'm kind of fine with that. I mean, Google tracks everybody anyway, but there is no benefit to the society at large. But if in this way you can somehow help preventing mass murder, at least for once this tracking is put to good use. I imagine they must have a lot of false positives so probably concentrate on the worst offenders. If someone is searching for a lot of sick stuff on wa…

I'm in the same boat, but we really need to update our justice system to compensate for the increase in trivial infractions.

social credit style systems can make a lot of sense here, eg: micro punishments and rewards

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#210

Post by tshaddox »

RattleyCooper wrote: post #103
AlbertCory wrote: post #60

I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I would bet SCOTUS rules this kind of warrant illegal. Google certainly has the resources to take the case that far. AFAIK a warrant usually is tied to a specific person or a specific crime. In other words, if an explosion killed Harry McHarryface, then it would be constitutional to ask for names of people who searched for Harry. Or if the fertilizer used in the bomb was shown to…

Look at it this way, if a car is involved in a drive-by shooting the police can't get a warrant to search every single home that has the same year/make/model of car registered to with that address. For a legal warrant you have to have probable cause that a specific person committed a crime. You can't just search everybody and see what sticks, that's blatantly unconstitutional.

Presumably this isn’t some easily-drawn line though, wouldn’t it be a judgment call (literally, made by a judge)? If the car was a specific color and model only 2 of which were registered in the state, would the judge issue a warrant for those 2 addresses?
Post reply on HN