FBI Quietly Seeks Broader Hacking Powers

The FBI is seeking to expand its hacking and surveillance powers through “an apparently backdoor route,” the Guardian reported Wednesday, a move that civil liberties groups say could infringe upon constitutional rights. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has proposed (pdf) an amendment to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, having to do with warrants for remote access to electronic data. The rule changes, according to the DOJ, would make it easier for law enforcement “to investigate and prosecute…crimes involving Internet anonymizing technologies,” such as Tor.

The federal Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules is scheduled to hear testimony on the proposal at a hearing next week.

The Guardian reports:


At that point, tech experts suggest, the FBI could employ “Network Investigative Techniques” to install malware that permits remote control of a computer and thus would allow the FBI to search and collect data from both a user’s hard drive as well as cloud-based storage systems such as Dropbox or Google Docs.

Because “[c]riminals are increasingly using sophisticated technologies that pose technical challenges to law enforcement,” the DOJ wrote in its proposal, permitting remote searches is “essential.”

But privacy advocates are warning against granting the FBI’s request too hastily or without considering the long-term technical implications.

“The Advisory Committee should proceed with extreme caution before expanding the government’s authority to conduct remote electronic searches,” the American Civil Liberties Union wrote in its submitted comments (pdf) on the rule change. “[T]he proposed amendment would significantly expand the government’s authority to conduct searches that raise troubling Fourth Amendment, statutory, and policy questions.”

The ACLU continued:

And watchdogs are also concerned about the way in which the DOJ is trying to expand its powers.

“This is an investigative technique that we haven’t seen before and we haven’t thrashed out the implications,” Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, told the Guardian. “It absolutely should not be done through a rule change—it has to be fully debated publicly, and Congress must be involved.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Click Here: Golf special

About The Author


Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *