• a keyword warrant has been upheld

    From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to All on Sun Oct 22 19:12:00 2023
    Seems like a search for anything will now lead to suspicion for
    anything convenient.

    "Today, the Colorado Supreme Court became the first state
    supreme court in the country to address the constitutionality
    of a keyword warrant-a digital dragnet tool that allows law
    enforcement to identify everyone who searched the internet for
    a specific term or phrase. In a weak and ultimately confusing
    opinion, the court upheld the warrant, finding the police
    relied on it in good faith. EFF filed two amicus briefs and was
    heavily involved in the case.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/10/colorado-supreme-court-upholds-keyword-search-warrant

    --
    ../|ug

    --- OpenXP 5.0.57
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Ogg on Mon Oct 23 06:45:00 2023
    Ogg wrote to All <=-

    Seems like a search for anything will now lead to suspicion for
    anything convenient.

    As long as it's in "good faith".

    "I remember that time at Christmas when I was searching for a pair of black crocs for you, yikes..."



    ... Filters, the sublime elevation of the lifter and the filters
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANTIR to Ogg on Wed Oct 25 13:01:39 2023
    Re: a keyword warrant has been upheld
    By: Ogg to All on Sun Oct 22 2023 07:12 pm

    Seems like a search for anything will now lead to suspicion for
    anything convenient.


    Don't trust the clearnet.

    If you do, you deserve what you get.

    Also, try to use search engine or search engine proxies located out of your jurisdiction.

    I think people is not aware of how much search engines can see of what we do, nor the extent of the control they have over us. At this point, if Google does not want you to find something, you won't find it, unless you belong to the minority of people using something else. This is the reason why many useful software projects that would undermine Google's dominance are completely unknown. They are outright removed from search results.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Arelor on Wed Oct 25 23:12:00 2023
    Hello Arelor!

    ** On Wednesday 25.10.23 - 13:01, Arelor wrote to Ogg:

    Don't trust the clearnet.

    If you do, you deserve what you get.

    Also, try to use search engine or search engine proxies located out of
    your jurisdiction.

    I think people is not aware of how much search engines can see of what we do, nor the extent of the control they have over us. At this point, if Google does not want you to find something, you won't find it, unless you belong to the minority of people using something else. This is the reason why many useful software projects that would undermine Google's dominance are completely unknown. They are outright removed from search results.

    I heard that DuckDuckGo was a better alternative to Google in
    that regard. Is it true?

    And there's more...

    https://www.businessinsider.com/google-can-give-police-keyword-data-from-search-histories-2020-10

    Documents from an arson attack linked to the R Kelly investigation show how Google hands 'keyword'
    search data to police

    Isobel Asher Hamilton

    5-6 minutes

    A court document relating to an alleged associate of singer
    R Kelly show that police investigators sent something
    called a "keyword warrant" to Google. Police were looking
    into an arson attack on a car outside the home of a witness
    in the R Kelly case. Google provided IP addresses of
    everyone who'd searched for the arson victim's address
    within a certain timeframe, which allowed police to
    pinpoint a suspect. The arson victim is a witness involved
    in the ongoing sexual racketeering case against R Kelly.
    The suspect, Michael Williams, is a family relation of R
    Kelly's former publicist. The warrant shows how police are
    increasingly able to issue broad warrants to tech
    companies, rather than focusing on individuals.

    A newly unsealed court document related to an alleged associate
    of singer R Kelly shows how Google can hand over data about
    what people search to the police.

    The court filing was submitted in July but unsealed on
    Wednesday. It details a police investigation into an arson
    attack on a car outside of the home of a witness involved in
    the ongoing sexual racketeering case against R Kelly.

    The court document showed that investigators linked Michael
    Williams - a family relation of R Kelly's former publicist - to
    the arson by sending something called a "keyword warrant" to
    Google. Specifically, police asked Google for any data on
    "users who had searched the address of the residence close in
    time to the arson."

    Google sent a list of IP addresses that had searched for the
    arson victim's address. Two IP addresses were linked to
    Williams' phone number, which police then used to track the
    phone's location. They were then able to determine the device
    was near the victim's car at the time of the arson attack.

    Per CNET, investigators then obtained a warrant for Williams'
    personal search history, which showed he'd searched for the
    terms: "where can i buy a .50 custom machine gun," "witness
    intimidation," and "countries that don't have extradition with
    the United States."

    Although requests for broad data sets to tech giants from
    police are not new, this case lays out exactly how tech
    companies co-operate with officers.

    "We require a warrant and push to narrow the scope of these
    particular demands when overly broad, including by objecting in
    court when appropriate," Richard Salgado, Google's director of
    law enforcement and information security, told CNET.

    "These data demands represent less than 1% of total warrants
    and a small fraction of the overall legal demands for user data
    that we currently receive," he added.

    The original warrant sent to Google has not yet been unsealed,
    but Williams' attorney Todd Spodek said he planned to challenge
    its legality, per CNET. "Think of the ramifications in the
    future if everyone who searched something in the privacy of
    their own home was subject to interviews by federal agents,"
    Spodek said.

    Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance
    Technology Oversight Project, also told CNET he thought keyword
    warrants could be in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

    "When a court authorizes a data dump of every person who
    searched for a specific term or address, it's likely
    unconstitutional," said Cahn.

    --
    --
    ../|ug

    --- OpenXP 5.0.57
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Jagossel@VERT/DMINE to Ogg on Thu Oct 26 11:03:06 2023
    Re: a keyword warrant has been upheld
    By: Ogg to Arelor on Wed Oct 25 2023 11:12 pm

    I think people is not aware of how much search engines can see of what w do, nor the extent of the control they have over us. At this point, if Google does not want you to find something, you won't find it, unless yo belong to the minority of people using something else. This is the reaso why many useful software projects that would undermine Google's dominanc are completely unknown. They are outright removed from search results.

    I heard that DuckDuckGo was a better alternative to Google in
    that regard. Is it true?

    I am using Duck Duck Go and used StartPage in the past. I am not sure how the search results stack up against Google's; I've ditched their search engine ages ago. Both StartPage and Duck Duck Go claim to he a more "private" seach engine that does not track you (color me skeptical, even cynical).
    ---
    Synchronet Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANTIR to Ogg on Thu Oct 26 16:32:38 2023
    Re: a keyword warrant has been upheld
    By: Ogg to Arelor on Wed Oct 25 2023 11:12 pm

    I heard that DuckDuckGo was a better alternative to Google in
    that regard. Is it true?

    Duckduckgo uses Bing as a backend, so if Bing is censored then so is Duckduckgo. What Duckduckgo offers is to let you use Bing without having BIng track your every move.

    I suspect the best alternative nowadays is to find a searx engine (such as searx.be or search.citadel.org). Searx is a metasearcher, so it uses LOTS of search engines at the same time. If Google is censoring footage of certain riots but some of the other search engines isn t, then a metasearcher has some chance of showing it up anyway.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANTIR to Jagossel on Thu Oct 26 16:37:11 2023
    Re: a keyword warrant has been upheld
    By: Jagossel to Ogg on Thu Oct 26 2023 11:03 am

    I am using Duck Duck Go and used StartPage in the past. I am not sure how th > that does not track you (color me skeptical, even cynical).

    Those may give you better conditions but they won t give you better results, since they are using either Bing or Google as backends.

    Not many independent search engines remain which maintain independent indexes. Gygablast bit the dust recently so that leaves Mojeek (ok for English results only). The remaining ones (such as wiby.me) are of limited use.

    If you are desperate to find something censored in big western search engines your best bet seems to be Yandex, but I dislike the interface so much.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Arelor on Thu Oct 26 19:28:23 2023
    Re: a keyword warrant has been upheld
    By: Arelor to Ogg on Thu Oct 26 2023 04:32 pm

    Duckduckgo uses Bing as a backend, so if Bing is censored then so is Duckduckgo. What Duckduckgo offers is to let you use Bing without having BIng track your every move.

    Interesting.. I had assumed Duckduckgo was its own independent search engine. I remember in 2011, hearing that Bing was using Google as a back-end and it was a bit of a surprise because Bing was supposed to be a new thing. I knew someone who joked, "Let me Google that with Bing."

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Arelor on Thu Oct 26 22:16:00 2023
    Hello Arelor!

    Duckduckgo uses Bing as a backend, so if Bing is censored then so is Duckduckgo. What Duckduckgo offers is to let you use Bing without having BIng track your every move.

    I don't see a place to adjust for Bing, but the default
    operation of DDG seems quite good.


    I suspect the best alternative nowadays is to find a searx engine (such
    as searx.be or search.citadel.org). Searx is a metasearcher, so it uses LOTS of search engines at the same time. If Google is censoring footage of certain riots but some of the other search engines isn t, then a metasearcher has some chance of showing it up anyway.

    Thx for the headsup on searx.be ..I like it so far.

    We don't really need Google anymore.

    --- OpenXP 5.0.57
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP