Comment on London's police asked Big Tech for private communications data over 700,000 times last year
Hirom@beehaw.org 1 week agoThe ability for police to request information is not controversial for crimes and online threats, given independant oversight, ideally a judge auhorizing a warrant.
What’s controversial is the scale, which suggest this power may be abuser and/or used disproportionately.
Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 1 week ago
A judge issuing a warrant just for the police to try and identify a suspect isn’t feasible or proportionate. Same logic would apply to requesting CCTV etc.
It would grind everything to a halt.
Where the warrant comes in is if you need to search a house and seize things.
As for the scale, I agree it does seem high. But like I said in another post, there isnt a cop in the land who has the time and inclination to put in subscriber requests just for the fun of it. The majority of those 700k requests will be on the back of a formal complaint/allegation of a crime.
Hirom@beehaw.org 1 week ago
A warrant is absolutely proportional for accessing private communications or searching private devices.
Privacy is a human right. It must be protected even if it’s not absolute. Having a judge approuve the equivalent of a wiretap is the right thing to do.
Abuse and disproportionate breach of privacy would certainly grind to a halt. It’s worth bothering a judge to wiretap a crime suspects, nor for minor offense or to harrass activists.
Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 1 week ago
I agree.
Requesting communications data from an ISP isn’t any of those things though.
Hirom@beehaw.org 1 week ago
What do you mean? It’s not a wiretap? Not about serious crime? Not an abuse of police power? None of the above?