I don't understand why the FBI isn't prepared to just act illegally in terrorism cases. If they're so damn sure that there's going to be an attack, just do the warrantless search and prevent the attack. And just be fine with the fact that they won't get to prosecute the bad guys -- the attack was thwarted, and that's good enough for me. And if they don't find anything? Well, Lucy's got some 'splainin to do!
FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
61–70 of 151 posts
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be the Bush administration.
You misspelled government.
"government" in general didn't decide US law enforcement and intelligence agencies needed to make terrorism a top priority, and it didn't decide the US needed "extrajudicial" options for dealing with terrorism, such as torture, kidnapping and indefinite detainment in a death camp in Cuba, and didn't decide to wage a war against "terrorism."
All of these things are the direct result of the Bush Administration taking advantage of post-9/11 fears to push the PATRIOT Act, and the "new normal" that terrorism posed such a grave and existential threat that nothing, not even the Constitution or the rule of law, should be allowed to get in the way of fighting it.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#63"The FBI wants to access N without a warrant." Sane answer: no, for all values of N.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#64Another reason to have an always-running VPN: they can't scrape what they can't see.
that doesn't really hide you from someone who really wants to find the source. many more steps are required to gain anonymity
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#65I don't understand why the FBI isn't prepared to just act illegally in terrorism cases. If they're so damn sure that there's going to be an attack, just do the warrantless search and prevent the attack. And just be fine with the fact that they won't get to prosecute the bad guys -- the attack was thwarted, and that's good enough for me. And if they don't find anything? Well, Lucy's got some 'splainin to do!
We don't want them acting illegally just because they feel it's necessary, but if someone really, truly believes they are stopping an attack by doing so, maybe let them do it that way and face the consequences. That's what the real heroes in movies do; they save the day, and then accept the punishment for their misdeeds in the process. A real hero would be willing to spend some time in jail if it was the only way to save thousands of lives (a point I do not concede, but for the sake of argument...).
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#66A couple decades ago when the government wanted to get civil forfeiture powers, they said it was only going to be for the worst organized crime bosses and drug lords. Then within the last few years, a black kid who takes his life savings -- $10,000 cash -- and moves across the country to start a new life is (apparently entirely legally) relieved of it by two police officers and has no means to get it back, despite ne…
Government can not be trusted. Something that the founding fathers and understood and warned centuries ago despite their own inherent flaws. Individual liberty is something that we need to defend actively from the government and that can not happen unless we take a diametrically opposite stance and do not concede even and inch of ground. Example: People who supported civil forfeiture essentially thought that its okay…
Taxes aren't the problem--it's the fees, law-enforcement-as-revenue-service, and other hacks to get around the lack of tax revenue that makes government nasty. I'd much rather pay taxes and zero out all government fees, civil forfeiture and non-criminal fines.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're surfing without noscript, ublock origin and self-destructing cookies?
I'm using ublock0 of course. I tend not to install lots of other addons because it's difficult to evaluate them without a significant time investment. What is a good self-destructing cookie addon that preserves site logins? Edit: While I'm here, Firefox should also provide an Android URL intent that opens links in a private tab.
I can't imagine ever surfing the internet without blocking ads, javascript and cookies. There's just nothing to evaluate other than which plugin to perform those tasks.
"self-destructing cookies", on the desktop, lets you choose to destroy cookies 1) when you close the tab, 2) when you close the browser or 3) never. On android it's a toggle; presumably 1 and 3.
The android version of noscript is inexplicably named "noscript nsa". It has a bunch of options but I never fiddle with them. You can't install it via the usual firefox plugin system for reasons I don't understand, so instead you have to get it here:
You want the link "Download NSA++ (NoScript 3.5 alpha)". It's been alpha for as long as I've been using it. A recent change to firefox means you probably have to use about:config to temporarily enable the installation of plugins from outside the official firefox plugin store thing.
Perhaps the developers are trying to demonstrate that you can't have security AND convenience.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#68"The FBI wants to access N without a warrant." Sane answer: no, for all values of N.
If the FBI asks for the power to access N without a warrant, it should be automatically be required to get two warrants from two separate judges to get access.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#69Warrants are so easy to get, why do they need this?
Looking at browser history might not hurt most people, but getting a warrant isn't hard, and it's the proper way to do things.
Re: FBI wants access to browser history without a warrant in terrorism, spy cases
#70A couple decades ago when the government wanted to get civil forfeiture powers, they said it was only going to be for the worst organized crime bosses and drug lords. Then within the last few years, a black kid who takes his life savings -- $10,000 cash -- and moves across the country to start a new life is (apparently entirely legally) relieved of it by two police officers and has no means to get it back, despite ne…
What is to be done, when dicking us over and harshly keeping us in line is profitable, and we keep electing them to do it ?!
>What is to be done
A people that doesn't pay attention to the government gets screwed by the government every time, no matter what rules are in place. That's why Lawrence Lessig is trying to change the rules to encourage people to take part.