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
I don’t have a problem with the police entering private homes and installing spyware when authorized by a court order supported by strong evidence. That’s narrowly focused on investigating crime.
What I’m very concerned about is attempts to perform surveillance without individualized suspicion or independent oversight.
I think installing spyware on someone’s device is two or three steps more drastic a measure than a simple search, which is about the extent of what a court order can authorize police to do right now. It feels conceptually close to tampering with evidence present at a (possible) crime scene. To add to this, spyware is not the same thing as installing a physical listening device in someone’s home. It requires far-reaching permissions on a system, and can influence lots of other software on the same system. You’d have to have an extreme level of confidence that this won’t lead to accidental or intentional planting of incriminating material. And, in my opinion that sort of load-bearing trust is not really something law enforcement has earned in the general case.