cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/54414754
In order to monitor encrypted communication, investigators will in future, according to the Senate draft and the Änderungen der Abgeordneten, not only be allowed to hack IT systems but also to secretly enter suspects’ apartments.
If remote installation of the spyware is technically not possible, paragraph 26 explicitly allows investigators to “secretly enter and search premises” in order to gain access to IT systems. In fact, Berlin is thus legalizing – as Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania did before – state intrusion into private apartments in order to physically install Trojans, for example via USB stick.
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
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 108 users / day
- 435 users / week
- 1.32K users / month
- 4.54K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 4.52K Posts
- 114K Comments
- Modlog
In the US it’s always been possible to do this with a proper warrant, though avoiding detection if the person expects something could be difficult. Security cameras and so on.
I’m not too bothered by this given how much work it is. They will only do it if there’s a criminal case or some other significant interest to work from. It’s not a tool of warrantless mass surveillance even though it’s been done abusively/illegally from time to time.
I was under the impression that not only has this been the law for decades, it used to be the only legal way of installing spyware and also exfiltrating data. But I can’t be assed to look it up.
Yeah, it doesn’t scale. Most of the surveillance (legal intercept, SINA hardware on ISP) and injection of government malware will be through the hostile network. People who run a tight ship will have a small attack surface.
In theory a judge has to look through each surveillance act of the police in germoney, in 12 years not a single one got denied. Because its paperwork to defend civil rights but just nodding to whatever the officers say costs nothing
Think about what we did in Ireland in the 80s. It’s no different, and it only worked marginally. Although that cpuld be because opsec was pretty good among the provisional IRA active cells.
Idk how stuff was done in Ireland but there weren’t so many computers then. It’s probably easier to install audio bugs than conduct an “evil maid attack” (infosec term for surreptitiously messing with someone’s computer, traditionally in the person’s hotel room) if they have taken any precautions.
Feeling like this is a gliding scale though. What’s next, a surveillance state?
I think those are two different things. They might do 1000s of secret break-ins per year, maybe 10,000’s. But probably not millions. OTOH, mass surveillance is used against just about everyone, i.e. billions. So the scale is different.
Here in the US, I suspect secret break-ins are rare, because they are risky (armed occupants etc). So they do SWAT raids instead. Abusive and too often fatal, but not that secret.
Yes, the EU itself is working hard on the surveillance state separately.
Chat control being one of them