Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing history fails

Re:Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing hist... by kube-system on Thursday May 14, 2020 @12:52PM (#23181948)

> Actual terrorists(like 9/11 type, well funded) know better than to even touch anything digital for comms. They literally get a drone strike for having called a known terrorist or for going to a wedding other terrorists with cell phones go to.

Terrorists don't use cell phones because terrorists use cell phones?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing hist... by jdc on Thursday May 14, 2020 @01:19PM (#23182344)

Smart terrorists don't use cellphones because stupid terrorists do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing hist... by jeffdavis on Thursday May 14, 2020 @01:55PM (#23182973)

So let's catch the stupid ones then?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing hist... by badrabbit on Friday May 15, 2020 @01:46AM (#23189285)

Even the stupid ones slip through! It takes one smart cell to repeat 9/11. The way you catch them is by targeted surveillance not by dragnet collection of information. The IC does this all the time,they do a powergrab make noise about it, achieve nothing and retain their power. Look at wmds in iraq,torturing,drone bombing,mass surveillance.

Theatrics to make it look like they are doing enough. Truth is, if someone immigrated or gets radicalized without detectio, the IC is relying on them not having good opsec. Spying on everyone (instead of with a warrant) , E2EE subversion,and these silly laws won't give them additional capacity when the actual terrorists and mass shooters that slip through already have bad opsec,don't use mainstream platforms or E2EE

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Patriot Act amendment needing a warrant for browsing hist... by danharaj on Thursday May 14, 2020 @02:13PM (#23183226)

Maybe the FBI should stop making them first.

[ Parent | on HN ]