Page 20 - July 2015 Issue
P. 20
access or by physically taking the items speciied by the warrant.
To get the warrant for the hack, the criteria must be set for probable cause, (more than a reasonable suspicion
that a crime has been committed), the criminal activity must be within the district where the U.S. Court and the
investigative agency has jurisdiction, the identity of the person and the address where the criminal activity is be-
ing perpetrated is known to the investigative agency.
In example: I am investigating a person who uses his computer to fence stolen goods. I know where the person
lives, but the stolen goods are not stored there. I swear out an afidavit to the Magistrate Judge, asking for a
search warrant to hack his computer to ind iles, statements, cookies, etc that prove the person is fencing goods
and to locate the stolen property.
The proposed rule change to Rule 41 that was issued by the DOJ on 9/18/13 states:
“A Magistrate Judge with authority in any District where activities related to a crime may have occurred has
authority to issue a warrant to use remote access to search electronic storage media and to seize electronically
stored information located within or outside the District”.
In a subsequent memo the DOJ put out on the same date, the DOJ contends that this proposed amendment to
Rule 41 would enable law enforcement to investigate and prosecute criminals who use Internet anonymizing
technology/privacy software or botnets.
In example: I am investigating an IP address that appears to be on the market selling stolen goods. I have no
idea who the perp is, no idea where the computer is physically located, the IP address is known to me, but uses
anonymous technology which masks the identity and location of the computer operator and address, but I have
more than a reasonable suspicion that the person masking the IP address is selling stolen goods.
I feel I should deine what a botnet is, as it is mentioned in the DOJ proposal. A botnet is a network of com-
puters deliberately infected with malware by a perpetrator to mask his identity and location. These infected
computers and their users have nothing to do with the perp, and are oftentimes infected by opening a suspicious
e-mail from said perp. This is how the computers become linked in a botnet.
In example: I am investigating an IP address that appears to be on the market selling stolen goods. The IP ad-
dress identiies twelve physical locations where the address originates. I have no idea who the perp is, no idea
where the master computer of the botnet is physically located, but I have more than a reasonable suspicion that
the master computer operator is selling stolen goods and to request a warrant to hack into these twelve comput-
ers to determine the identity of the master operator and gain evidence that a crime was committed.
Critics state that it is a clear violation of our 4th Amendment Rights:
Richard Salgado, Google, Inc.,Photo courtesy of webpronews.com
20
To get the warrant for the hack, the criteria must be set for probable cause, (more than a reasonable suspicion
that a crime has been committed), the criminal activity must be within the district where the U.S. Court and the
investigative agency has jurisdiction, the identity of the person and the address where the criminal activity is be-
ing perpetrated is known to the investigative agency.
In example: I am investigating a person who uses his computer to fence stolen goods. I know where the person
lives, but the stolen goods are not stored there. I swear out an afidavit to the Magistrate Judge, asking for a
search warrant to hack his computer to ind iles, statements, cookies, etc that prove the person is fencing goods
and to locate the stolen property.
The proposed rule change to Rule 41 that was issued by the DOJ on 9/18/13 states:
“A Magistrate Judge with authority in any District where activities related to a crime may have occurred has
authority to issue a warrant to use remote access to search electronic storage media and to seize electronically
stored information located within or outside the District”.
In a subsequent memo the DOJ put out on the same date, the DOJ contends that this proposed amendment to
Rule 41 would enable law enforcement to investigate and prosecute criminals who use Internet anonymizing
technology/privacy software or botnets.
In example: I am investigating an IP address that appears to be on the market selling stolen goods. I have no
idea who the perp is, no idea where the computer is physically located, the IP address is known to me, but uses
anonymous technology which masks the identity and location of the computer operator and address, but I have
more than a reasonable suspicion that the person masking the IP address is selling stolen goods.
I feel I should deine what a botnet is, as it is mentioned in the DOJ proposal. A botnet is a network of com-
puters deliberately infected with malware by a perpetrator to mask his identity and location. These infected
computers and their users have nothing to do with the perp, and are oftentimes infected by opening a suspicious
e-mail from said perp. This is how the computers become linked in a botnet.
In example: I am investigating an IP address that appears to be on the market selling stolen goods. The IP ad-
dress identiies twelve physical locations where the address originates. I have no idea who the perp is, no idea
where the master computer of the botnet is physically located, but I have more than a reasonable suspicion that
the master computer operator is selling stolen goods and to request a warrant to hack into these twelve comput-
ers to determine the identity of the master operator and gain evidence that a crime was committed.
Critics state that it is a clear violation of our 4th Amendment Rights:
Richard Salgado, Google, Inc.,Photo courtesy of webpronews.com
20
