
"Last week, the Dutch Minister of Safety and Justice asked the Parliament of the Netherlands to pass a law allowing police to obtain warrants to do the following: install malware on targets’ private computers, conduct remote searches on local and foreign computers to collect evidence, and delete data on remote computers in order to disable the accessibility of 'illegal files'. Requesting assistance from the country where the targetted computer(s) were located would be 'preferred' but possibly not required. These proposals are alarming, could have extremely problematic consequences, and may violate European human rights law." You
get true net neutrality with one hand,
but this idiocy with another. This reminds me a lot of how some of our busy intersections are designed; by people who bike to city hall all their lives and have no clue what it's like to drive a car across their pretty but extremely confusing and hence dangerous intersections.
Member since:
2010-02-18
It's a matter of trust, indeed.
One big issue is that there's no remote chance of ensuring due process when it comes to "evidence" that's collected on a cracked box.
While malicious police officers can always lose a zip-lock bag with weed while conducting an appartment search, that's an isolated data point - bits are all alike, and terribly easy to copy. That makes for quite untraceable tampering of evidence.
And now we're exclusively in the realm of trust.
Consider a search using these powers for child pornography: After things are done, there's no useful evidence that this data was there _before_ the search was started (except if they also raid the appartment and find other evidence, such as hard copies - in which case: raid the appartment, find the hard copies, bust the bastard; no remote computer search required).