News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment rights, judge rules [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by chaps on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @03:32PM (#41999240)
Erm, "Assigned" in this context is not new: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/17...

"More simply, a hash value is a string of characters obtained by processing the contents of a given computer file and assigning a sequence of numbers and letters that correspond to the file’s contents."

From 2018 in United States v. Reddick.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by kwanbix on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @03:33PM (#41999250)
The calculation is what assigns the value.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by toyg on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @03:42PM (#41999339)
Yes, Google's calculation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by oefnak on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @04:58PM (#42000218)
Did Google invent this hash?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by chaps on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @05:04PM (#42000287)
Why is that relevant? Google used a hashing function to persist a new record within a database. They created a record for this.

Like I said in a sib. comment, this FOIA lawsuit goes into questions of hashing pretty well: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-2nd-circuit/2185910.htm...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google's TOS doesn't eliminate a user's Fourth Amendment ... by chaps on Wednesday October 30, 2024 @05:02PM (#42000274)
No. The calculation is what determines what the assignation should be. It does not actually assign anything.

This FOIA litigation by ACLU v ICE goes into this topic quite a lot: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-2nd-circuit/2185910.htm...

[ Parent | on HN ]