RE: Feds after Google data

["Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net>]

For what its worth:

[snip]

The specifics of the case are a bit worrisome, because the government is specifically asking for the data to try to 
prove that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) is necessary. We've discussed problems with that law in the past, and 
the Supreme Court agreed that it was problematic -- though, offered the government a chance to make its argument again.

It's no surprise, actually, that they subpoenaed Google. After all, in the original defense before the Supreme Court, 
Solicitor General Theodore Olson tried to use the Google results count for "free porn" as proof of why the law was 
needed.

As we noted at the time, the Justices saw through that argument immediately, pointing out that just because there are 
search results on that term, it doesn't mean they're all pornographic -- meaning such numbers don't prove much. 
However, it appears the government's lawyers have figured out that superficial evidence from Google isn't enough -- so 
they might as well get a lot more detailed info, in the form of one whole week's worth of search results.

This is worrisome, in part, because by hiding this behind the "protecting kids from porn" argument will distract from 
the real issue, and could set a bad precedent.

It's also worth noting that the government claims other search engines had no problem at all turning over similar data 
-- which may be the most worrying point.

John Battelle points out how this could destroy the public's trust in search engines while Michael Bazely raises some 
additional issues about this government action, including comparing it to the new European data retention laws. As 
Bazely points out, this may not turn out to be the "watershed" case many are expecting concerning the privacy of our 
data -- but it's certainly going to shine a bright light on a lot of legal questions that have remained unanswered. 

[snip]

http://techdirt.com/articles/20060119/0245242_F.shtml

- ferg



-- "Blanchard, Michael \(InfoSec\)" <Blanchard_Michael () emc com> wrote:

"....The government contends it needs the Google data to
determine how often pornography shows up in online searches... "

 why don't they just google the word porn...  37,500,000 hits
Pornography: 19,500,000
Child porn: 7,100,000  (of course many sites are for "reporting of...")


[snip]

-----Original Message-----
From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of Richard M. Smith
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:22 AM
To: funsec () linuxbox org
Subject: [funsec] Feds after Google data

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/13657303.htm

Feds after Google data
RECORDS SOUGHT IN U.S. QUEST TO REVIVE PORN LAW
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News

[snip]

--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg () netzero net or fergdawg () sbcglobal net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.