LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-20-2017, 03:16 PM   #1
frankbell
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Debian, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 11,799
Blog Entries: 13

Rep: Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948
Unwarranted Warrant


Minnesota, USA, judge issues search warrant telling Google to empty the sack.

A nugget from the news item:

Quote:
Issued by Hennepin County District Judge Gary Larson in early February, the warrant pertains to anyone who searched variations of the residentís name on Google from Dec. 1 through Jan. 7.

In addition to basic contact information for people targeted by the warrant, Google is being asked to provide Edina police with their Social Security numbers, account and payment information, and IP (internet protocol) and MAC (media access control) addresses.
Words fail me.

Follow the link for details.
 
Old 03-20-2017, 03:23 PM   #2
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 64-bit with multilib
Posts: 2,310

Rep: Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613
From that article:
Quote:
Google says it receives an increasing number of data requests from governments and courts every year. In the first half of 2016, Google received more than 14,000 requests from the U.S. alone and provided information for 79 percent of them.
We are ever closer and closer to 1984 folks - get those VPNs asap because the EU in collusion with state dept. here are tightening the noose on how we get information, what we say etc.
 
Old 03-20-2017, 04:04 PM   #3
jefro
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,859

Rep: Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301
What is the reason for the request? Did someone stalk some person and murder them by using the web searchs?
 
Old 03-20-2017, 04:34 PM   #4
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 7,672

Rep: Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439
Of far more concern should have been ... "just what would that searcher have been able to find?"

We have been in a "1984" – one far worse than George Orwell ever could have imagined – for many decades now.

I am willing to give a judge the presumption that he understood his office and that he felt that the warrant requested should be approved and subsequently issued by his Court.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-20-2017 at 04:36 PM.
 
Old 03-20-2017, 07:13 PM   #5
jefro
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,859

Rep: Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301Reputation: 2301
I can't say but I could imagine a crime where police have some victim and are looking for the perpetrator. They could consider using reverse searching to see if they could find out who was looking for the victim.
 
Old 03-20-2017, 07:38 PM   #6
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 7,672

Rep: Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro View Post
I can't say but I could imagine a crime where police have some victim and are looking for the perpetrator. They could consider using reverse searching to see if they could find out who was looking for the victim.
Uh huh. Well, given that so-far they are still required to "convince a judge," let us hope that he was sufficiently worldly.

"Worldly cynic" that I am, I do hope that the results of their search prove, to them, to have been worth the trouble. And, I do(!) bid them the best(!!) of success(!) in their quest to track down the perpetrator of some dastardly crime. Likewise, I cannot fault a judge for officially telling them ... "okay, go ahead ... good luck."

And certainly I do not consider any such warrant to be ... "unwarranted."

... "a waste of time?" ... we shall see. But "unwarranted?" No. I think that the detectives were quite reasonable in their request, given the circumstances, and that the judge was correct in granting it. I believe that, going forward, such requests should be considered to be "quite routine."

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-20-2017 at 07:41 PM.
 
Old 03-20-2017, 09:53 PM   #7
frankbell
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Debian, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 11,799
Blog Entries: 13

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948
Quote:
And certainly I do not consider any such warrant to be ... "unwarranted."
If warrants are issued with insufficient cause, I would certainly call them unwarranted.

Doing so may be a linguistic contradiction, but it's not an oxymoron.
 
Old 03-21-2017, 02:05 AM   #8
hazel
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: Debian, Crux, LFS, AntiX, NuTyX
Posts: 830

Rep: Reputation: 333Reputation: 333Reputation: 333Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro View Post
What is the reason for the request? Did someone stalk some person and murder them by using the web searchs?
Didn't you read the link? It was an identity theft. Someone had found out the victim's details (including a social security number) and forged a passport to act as an ID, then stole a lot of money from a credit union account. The police established that the photograph on the fake passport could only be found via Google.
 
Old 03-21-2017, 04:42 AM   #9
ardvark71
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Lubuntu 14.04, Windows Vista
Posts: 5,850
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 788Reputation: 788Reputation: 788Reputation: 788Reputation: 788Reputation: 788Reputation: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell View Post
Words fail me.
Hi...

No kidding...wow.

Regards...
 
Old 03-21-2017, 07:00 AM   #10
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Walsall, UK
Posts: 1,847
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916Reputation: 916
Yet another "clue" as to why your life should not be published on the WWW.

This is just an example of a police department using "snooping powers" because they can. And the end result could potentially incriminate the wrong person(s). Isn't it likely the thief was clued up enough to cover their tracks (tor, etc) rather than searching in the clear...?
 
Old 03-21-2017, 08:53 AM   #11
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 7,672

Rep: Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439Reputation: 2439
Unfortunately they could have used any search engine, such as DuckDuckGo.

I find it interesting, though, that they forged a passport. My US Passport certainly does not look like it would be very easy to fake.

It does appear that the request for a warrant was "warranted," and it is very important that they sought a warrant, as the law requires. I wish the investigators the best of success because they are certainly taking a long shot.

And the fundamental issue remains – just how much highly-personal information is being collected surreptitiously, and spewed on the Internet.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-21-2017 at 08:54 AM.
 
Old 03-21-2017, 09:49 AM   #12
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 64-bit with multilib
Posts: 2,310

Rep: Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613Reputation: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
Just how much highly-personal information is being collected surreptitiously, and spewed on the Internet.
This is the fault of the user. Yes there are also sites out there that steal information, but that is pointless since you can now just get all that you need on facebook - phone numbers, names, dates, etc.
 
Old 03-21-2017, 09:59 AM   #13
moxieman99
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Dabble, but latest used are Fedora 13 and Ubuntu 10.4.1
Posts: 419

Rep: Reputation: 146Reputation: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
Unfortunately they could have used any search engine, such as DuckDuckGo.
The article said that the picture did not turn up in other search engines, so that narrowed it down to Google. Had it not been narrowed down to Google, then yes, it'd be an impermissible drag net search.

My question is; how did they get the woman's social security number?

Forging a passport shows an above average level of sophistication.

No harm in asking for the warrant here. One would expect a detective to check on "whose been asking around for [Joe]?" back in pre-internet days, so given that the picture was only found using a Google search, asking Google for that information is reasonable.
 
Old 03-21-2017, 01:39 PM   #14
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 4,306

Rep: Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294Reputation: 1294
On the one hand, we have a very skilled criminal who has swindled someone out of $28.000 and will no doubt do it again. The police and the judge naturally want that person stopped.

On the other hand, we have those who would rather that the criminal remained at large than that the police should be "snooping". When I contemplate that "reasoning", words don't fail me, but I'll refrain from using them!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
fastmail.fm claims their U.S. servers are protected from unwarranted surveillance libCognition Linux - Security 1 05-01-2012 09:40 AM
LXer: British PCs can now hack your personal computer without a warrant LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-06-2009 08:10 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration