With Rule 41, Little-Known Committee Proposes to Grant New Hacking Powers to the Government

The government hacking into phones and seizing computers remotely? It’s not the plot of a dystopian blockbuster summer movie. It’s a proposal from an obscure committee that proposes changes to court procedures—and if we do nothing, it will go into effect in December.

The proposal comes from the advisory committee on criminal rules for the Judicial Conference of the United States. The amendment [PDF] would update Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, creating a sweeping expansion of law enforcement’s ability to engage in hacking and surveillance. The Supreme Court just passed the proposal to Congress, which has until December 1 to disavow the change or it becomes the rule governing every federal court across the country. This is part of a statutory process through which federal courts may create new procedural rules, after giving public notice and allowing time for comment, under a “rules enabling act.”1

*

The first part of this change would grant authority to practically any judge to issue a search warrant to remotely access, seize, or copy data relevant to a crime when a computer was using privacy-protective tools to safeguard one's location. Many different commonly used tools might fall into this category. For example, people who use Tor, folks running a Tor node, or people using a VPN would certainly be implicated. It might also extend to people who deny access to location data for smartphone apps because they don’t feel like sharing their location with ad networks. It could even include individuals who change the country setting in an online service, like folks who change the country settings of their Twitter profile in order to read uncensored Tweets.

*

The second part of the proposal is just as concerning. It would grant authorization to a judge to issue a search warrant for hacking, seizing, or otherwise infiltrating computers that may be part of a botnet. This means victims of malware could find themselves doubly infiltrated: their computers infected with malware and used to contribute to a botnet, and then government agents given free rein to remotely access their computers as part of the investigation. Even with the best of intentions, a government agent could well cause as much or even more harm to a computer through remote access than the malware that originally infected the computer. Malicious actors may even be able to hijack the malware the government uses to infiltrate botnets, because the government often doesn't design its malware securely. Government access to the computers of botnet victims also raises serious privacy concerns, as a wide range of sensitive, unrelated personal data could well be accessed during the investigation. This is a dangerous expansion of powers, and not something to be granted without any public debate on the topic.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/rule-41-little-known-committee-pro...

***

This will effect computers WORLDWIDE, not just in the US. And it will go into effect in December. We are so screwed.

EDIT: Link to the PDF

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/proposed-amendme...

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

detroitmechworks's picture

For those not familiar, 20 years ago a small game company had their entire computer network hardware seized under an unsigned warrant by the secret service on the suspicion that someone had at some time posted a classified document on their bulletin board.

Course, it was a bad precedent, which seems to have infected law enforcement mentality in general.

up
0 users have voted.

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

NonnyO's picture

... and their corporate tribunals that will have precedence over judges in the US judicial system, and the judicial systems in any country signed on to TPP, especially when they involve legal suits when corporations sue governments for damages because some kind of law (e.g., cigarette warnings) cut into their profit margins if people stop smoking (or whatever else they can sue over and win against any country).

Dirty, rotten, no good sunofabitchin' greedy bastages!!!

up
0 users have voted.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute ..., where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference. — President John F. Kennedy, Houston, TX, 12 September 1960

Amanda Matthews's picture

pass and this will go into law.

We peasants best bow down to our overlords. And get that silly idea that we still have rights out of our heads.

up
0 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa