Sunday Times 2
Google fights proposal that could let US government remotely hack devices anywhere in the world
Google has condemned proposals that will allow the US government to remotely search computers anywhere in the world.
An advisory committee plans to change the way search warrants are issued by federal and state judges.
The amendment would let the US government obtain a warrant to conduct ‘remote access’ searches of electronic storage media if its location is ‘concealed by technological means.’
But in a blog post strongly opposing these plans, Google has warned this amendment could lead to devices being tracked globally and is calling on the debate to be taken to Congress.
The amendment was proposed last year by the Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure, at the request of the Department of Justice.
It specifically relates to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 that governs the issue of search warrants.
As it stands, Rule 41 largely prohibits a federal judge from issuing a search warrant outside of the judge’s district.
Under the proposals, exceptions to this rule would be added to include computers and networks.
In particular, the change would let authorities apply for a warrant and remotely search storage if the media has been hidden.
The location of such media can be concealed using private networks, for example, or by rerouting traffic across multiple servers.
The committee explained the searches would be useful when investigating botnets, for example, but Google is concerned.
Botnets are network of computers that are controlled by hackers to send spam or spread malware.
Criminals use malicious software to turn a victim’s computer into a bot, also known as a zombie. The computer can then be used to spread files without the owner’s knowledge.
The California firm’s legal director Richard Salgado said: ‘The implications of this expansion of warrant power are significant, and are better addressed by Congress.
‘First, the proposed amendment would likely end up being used by authorities to directly search computers and devices around the world.’
He continued that even if the committee intends to apply the changes to devices in the US, ‘there is nothing in the proposed change to Rule 41 that would prevent access to computers and devices worldwide.’
Secondly, he believes the proposal threatens to undermine the privacy rights and computer security of internet users.
For example, the change would ignore territorial limits on the use of warrants to conduct ‘remote access’, and the proposal does not define under what circumstances a remote search could be undertaken.
‘It merely assumes such searches, whatever they may be, are constitutional and otherwise legal’ continued Mr Salgado.
And this ‘carries with it the spectre of government hacking without any Congressional debate or democratic policymaking process.’
Mr Salgado also raises concerns that ‘concealed by technological means’ could be applied to the kinds of virtual private networks (VPNs) used by banks and online retailers to keep their networks secure.
Google’s specific argument for wanting the issue to be debated in Congress is the risk the proposals could cause to international treaties.
For example, the US has diplomatic agreements with other countries to cooperate in investigations, known as Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs).
‘Google supports ongoing efforts to improve cooperation among governments, and we are concerned that the proposed change to Rule 41 could undermine those efforts,’ said Mr Salgado.
‘The significant foreign relations issues associated with the proposed change to Rule 41 should be addressed by Congress and the President, not the Advisory Committee.
‘The Advisory Committee is entertaining a dramatic change to electronic surveillance rules.
‘Congress is the proper body to determine whether such changes are warranted, and we urge the Committee to respect Congress’ traditional role in prescribing the substantive rules governing electronic surveillance.’
In addition to voicing its concerns, Google has officially filed its opposition to the changes to the advisory committee.
© Daily Mail, London
| WHAT IS THE RULE 41 PROPOSAL? The amendment was proposed last year by the Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure, at the request of the Department of Justice. |