Skip to content
  • About Me
  • Books
  • Photography
  • Papers
  • Security
  • Forensics
  • Essays
  • Christianity

Calendar

January 2023
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
« Dec    

Archives

  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • July 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • September 2021
  • July 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • March 2020
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • November 2018
  • August 2018
  • March 2018
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • July 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • June 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • December 2012
  • May 2012
  • September 2011
  • June 2011
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • July 2009
  • May 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • June 2007
  • August 2006
  • February 2006

Categories

  • Apple
  • Christianity
  • Essays
  • Forensics
  • General
  • Machine Learning
  • Music
  • Opinion
  • Photography
  • Politics
  • Security











ZdziarskiDFIR, security, reverse engineering, photography, theology, funky bass guitar. All opinions are my own.
  • About Me
  • Books
  • Photography
  • Papers
  • Security
  • Forensics
  • Essays
  • Christianity
General

A Major Supreme Court Ruling on its Way

On May 3, 2014 by Jonathan Zdziarski

I recently gave an interview with Forbes discussing the technical implications of a case recently heard by the Supreme Court about warrantless mobile phone searches. The technical reasons for not allowing this to go on are many, including the most severe penalty of potentially destroying evidence that you would otherwise need to prosecute a case (should the suspect be found to have committed a crime). There is a far more important dimension to this SCOTUS case, however; the ruling to come could potentially change the face of our constitutional rights as it pertains to data.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees our right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects from unreasonable search and seizure. Most Americans today recognize our cellphones (and the data that is on them) as a part of our papers and effects; a cellphone itself is a personal effect, in fact. Papers, as items containing information, are covered as well and easily apply to data (electronic paper). When we discuss warrantless cellphone searches, we’re actually talking about “seizure of data”; in fact there is a mobile forensics tool even called “Device Seizure”.

If the Supreme Court rules that “collection” of data from a mobile device does not qualify as “seizure”, or that collecting such data is not covered under the Fourth Amendment, this ruling could have severe implications for domestic surveillance. By ruling data out of the Fourth, domestic surveillance (such as that going on by the NSA) and other similar efforts to intercept data could not only be essentially legalized by SCOTUS, but could also further extend the government’s reach into our personal lives by giving the government the legal OK to proactively and invasively collect personal data directly from people’s laptops or mobile phones – without a warrant, and either on a whim or continuously on a broad scale. We have already learned that NSA has such capabilities, but what would happen if “data collection” was ruled legal and only required a warrant to look at the data?

This case, combined with the fact that SCOTUS doesn’t likely understand the technology here and what’s at risk, could potentially open a huge door for further and more invasive intrusion into people’s data (and personal lives) by the government. We already know that governments will go as far as they possibly can stretch the law. Watch this one closely; this case could potentially allow for the surveillance state of tomorrow.

Archives

  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • July 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • September 2021
  • July 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • March 2020
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • November 2018
  • August 2018
  • March 2018
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • July 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • June 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • December 2012
  • May 2012
  • September 2011
  • June 2011
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • July 2009
  • May 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • June 2007
  • August 2006
  • February 2006

Calendar

January 2023
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
« Dec    

Categories

  • Apple
  • Christianity
  • Essays
  • Forensics
  • General
  • Machine Learning
  • Music
  • Opinion
  • Photography
  • Politics
  • Security

All Content Copyright (c) 2000-2022 by Jonathan Zdziarski, All Rights Reserved