Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Keyword Search Warrant
www.eff.orgToday, the Colorado Supreme Court became the first state supreme court in the country to address the constitutionality of a keyword warrant—a digital dragnet tool that allows law enforcement to identify everyone who searched the internet for a specific term or phrase. In a weak and ultimately...
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.47K Posts
- 58.8K Comments
- Modlog
deleted by creator
The Colorado Supreme Court is most certainly not the highest court in the land… I would like to see this reviewed at the federal level, because it appears unconstitutional.
I hate to break it to you but look at the current supreme court and sincerely tell me they won’t uphold this bullshit.
Now you know not to search on Google regarding planned acts
of terrorismagainst the establishment tyranny. But what the heck are you doing searching on Google anyway?We know that police and courts don’t believe in fourth amendment protections, especially when it comes to people they really want to convict. The problem is, when they justify illegally obtained evidence for child molesters and serial killers, then it’s easy to justify the same for illegal parkers in non-white neighborhoods, or persons protesting against law enforcement overreach.
And that’s why the state of the US engages in the same indictments that are listed in the US Declaration of Independence.
I’m a computer engineer with over 30 years of experience. If I’d want to be a terrorist, they can Monitor google, and they wouldn’t find me. They can decrypt WhatsApp and a few others and they’d still not find me. They wouldn’t be able to find anyone halfway capable.
What they WOULD find is a lot of people just going about their day.
Makes you wonder who they’re trying to target with all this shit.
Banning encryption won’t stop child porn, not even a little bit
Monitoring google won’t stop terrorism (or child porn) not even a little bit
Can we please Please PLEASE make a law that requires politicians to know what they’re taking about? If a politician votes about banning encryption, he either know what it does and why it works or if he doesn’t know, he.doesnt get to vote.
deleted by creator
Just add ‘in Minecraft’ at the end
Very cool, very legal.
Well, not the highest one. This was a state supreme court, fortunately.
deleted by creator
He was referring to its altitude.
And it’s pot smoking