Is anyone concerned about "Rule 41?"

[4snosiucct 1]

As this would affect VPN technology, is anyone concerned about the reach of the US government if this passes?

 

http://www.govtech.com/security/FBI-Silicon-Valley-Clash-Over-Hacking-Power-of-Rule-41.html

[LZ1 672]

Hello !

 

This should be moved to off-topic, where similar threads have been made.

You don't have to worry I think. It's not as if they haven't been doing all their usual illegal and immoral things for a long time either. That's not to be apathetic of course, because

it is nasty. It's just I don't think it'll really affect or be noticeable on the day-to-day VPN use of at least AirVPN. But you know, as usual, we'll see. AirVPN will do its best

to mitigate any possible damage/effects as usual :].

[jonnymoon96 4]

you are protected by the 4th amendment of the us constitution so unless you do crime you should be okay

[LZ1 672]

you are protected by the 4th amendment of the us constitution so unless you do crime you should be okay

Sadly not quite the whole truth.

 

1. Edward Snowden revealed the world-wide spying conducted by many Western countries
2. There's many ways to side-step any such rules, whether constitutional or not
3. The FBI and other similar institutions have proven time and again that they're willing to spy on anyone and everything

The problem is manifold. For instance, how do you hold an organisation accountable for its actions, if its actions are kept secret? Ah, you just make it mandatory to get a warrant, right?

Well, the FISA court solved that problem for a lot of cases; it's a rubber-stamp closed-court system, wherein virtually all warrants are granted. Nothing is turned down.

How do you prevent legal-loophooles and "whoopsie" mistakes? For instance, if the NSA collects data on you, it could simply say it was an accident; but how

can you be sure the data is deleted? And then there's other loopholes; what do you think "cooperation" means in an intelligence context for instance? Sharing of information.

In other words, one of their favoured ways of bypassing local restrictions on data-collection, is to simply have an agency from a different country and thus outside the local jurisdiction,

do the collecting. Then the collected information is simply shared. Both agencies can then claim they didn't collect information on their own citizens, while also claming they're working together with others.

 

In short, you don't have to commit crimes to be spied on. In fact, it's a bit of a catch 22. Because if you don't do anythig to resist, you can be sure you'll be spied on. While if you do do somethingto resist,

such as using a VPN, you could just as well be flagged as suspicious and thereby warranting even more surveillance. This is the whole problem: mass-surveillance. You spy on everybody in order to make

sure nothing slips through the net, but in doing so, you end up compromising essential human rights and democratic liberties, which SHOULD be protected. It's a huge problem. So please, don't have

the false sense of security that you're protected because of laws X, Y and Z

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

you are protected by the 4th amendment of the us constitution so unless you do crime you should be okay

 

(Will)power cannot be stopped by words written down on a sheet of paper labeled "constitution".. that's exactly the NSA's position and thinking.

[LZ1 672]

you are protected by the 4th amendment of the us constitution so unless you do crime you should be okay

Actually, I found a very nice little doc you can watch, that will explain it.