Feeds

Feds publish computer search manual

One word: crypto

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

The Essential Guide to IT Transformation

When the Feds lack evidence sufficient to hustle a judge into issuing a warrant to examine a computer's contents, they often politely ask the owner or someone who shares it if they might just have a quick peek at the contents of its HD. Incredibly, a significant number of people foolishly cooperate, and so reveal enough evidence for the nosey buggers to bring to a judge and get the desired warrant.

So Lesson One of the US Department of Justice's latest how-to publication, "Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations", is 'Just Say No'.

Not that it always works. Your idiot roommate, parent or spouse, if s/he shares your computer, can give the Feds permission to search it. The way to defeat that is to encrypt any file you'd prefer agents of Uncle Sam not see. This puts your data in a category similar to the contents of a locked box to which your housemates haven't got a key. They are assumed not to have authority to open it, and obviously not to have the authority to let anyone else do so either.

Another risky practice is leaving potentially incriminating data unencrypted on a disk when the box is sent to a repairman. Here the repair flake may not authorise the Feds to search your box; the law assumes you have a reasonable expectation of privacy from government snooping when you surrender property for the limited purpose of getting it fixed.

Ah, but nothing can stop the ten-thumbed technician from doing his own, private search of the machine, and alerting the Feds to your collection of bestiality pics. In that case, the coppers are authorised to recapitulate the private search, and if that bit of cherry picking should turn up enough evidence to get a warrant, you're stuffed (not to mention keenly embarrassed).

"The fact that a private person has uncovered evidence of a crime on another person's computer does not permit agents to search the entire computer. Instead, the private search permits the agents to view the evidence that the private search revealed, and, if necessary, to use that evidence as a basis for procuring a warrant to search the rest of the computer," the manual explains.

And in some instances the Feds can lie to you, or anyone else in control of your machine, and still conduct a legal search with consent.

One William Roberts last year was told by agents at an airport that they were searching for "currency" and "high technology or other data" that could not be exported legally.

Of course what they were really looking for was just what they found; the large collection of kiddie porn Roberts had on his laptop machine. Poor Roberts imagined that by consenting to let the Feds look for something he knew he didn't have, the rest of his data would be protected by Constitutional requirements of specificity in searches. Little did he know that while en route to France he and his possessions occupied a Constitutional nether-world. He was being treated to a so-called 'border search', in which the Feds enjoy grossly expanded powers.

And there is the growing trend towards executing 'no-knock' searches of computers, which the DoJ thinks is a splendid practice.

"Agents may need to conduct no-knock searches in computer crime cases because technically adept suspects may 'hot wire' their computers in an effort to destroy evidence. For example, technically adept computer hackers have been known to use 'hot keys,' computer programs that destroy evidence when a special button is pressed. If agents knock at the door to announce their search, the suspect can simply press the button and activate the program to destroy the evidence," the DoJ warns.

Here again, as in all the previous cases, there's only one reliable way to protect your privacy: encryption. Use it. ®

Related Story

Hollywood, software groups push DoJ copyright busts

HP ProLiant Gen8: Integrated lifecycle automation

More from The Register

next story
BBC goes offline in MASSIVE COCKUP: Stephen Fry partly muzzled
Auntie tight-lipped as major outage rolls on
iPad? More like iFAD: We reveal why Apple fell into IBM's arms
But never fear fanbois, you're still lapping up iPhones, Macs
White? Male? You work in tech? Let us guess ... Twitter? We KNEW it!
Grim diversity numbers dumped alongside Facebook earnings
Bose says today IS F*** With Dre Day: Beats sued in patent battle
Music gear giant seeks some of that sweet, sweet Apple pie
HP, Microsoft prove it again: Big Business doesn't create jobs
SMEs get lip service - what they need is dinner at the Club
ITC: Seagate and LSI can infringe Realtek patents because Realtek isn't in the US
Land of the (get off scot) free, when it's a foreign owner
Amazon Reveals One Weird Trick: A Loss On Almost $20bn In Sales
Investors really hate it: Share price plunge as growth SLOWS in key AWS division
Dude, you're getting a Dell – with BITCOIN: IT giant slurps cryptocash
1. Buy PC with Bitcoin. 2. Mine more coins. 3. Goto step 1
prev story

Whitepapers

Top three mobile application threats
Prevent sensitive data leakage over insecure channels or stolen mobile devices.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Designing a Defense for Mobile Applications
Learn about the various considerations for defending mobile applications - from the application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.