BuffaloFeeds » Slashdot » Does Cheap Tech Undermine Legal Privacy Protections?

Feeds

105363 items (97572 unread) in 19 feeds

Friends (1021 unread)

• 2 Star (84 unread)
• John Carrino (12 unread)
• Comments for Josh the Outspoken (296 unread)
• Josh (34 unread)
• Planet Matt (595 unread)

Build (68091 unread)

• MAKE Magazine (20292 unread)
• Instructables.com (35006 unread)
• Hack A Day (5017 unread)
• Toolmonger (7776 unread)

Heads (716 unread)

• Exploration Through Example
• Paul Graham: Unofficial RSS Feed (113 unread)
• Stevey's Blog Rants (34 unread)
• Joel on Software (207 unread)
• Gibson Blog (239 unread)
• Adventures in Bloggery (123 unread)

News (27537 unread)

• Slashdot (25203 unread)
• Economist.com Global Agenda (1412 unread)
• Ruby Inside (922 unread)

fun (207 unread)

• Templar, Arizona (207 unread)

Slashdot

• 

  Does Cheap Tech Undermine Legal Privacy Protections?

  Posted: January 5th, 2010, 10:44am MST by timothy

  bfwebster writes "Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor who focuses on legal issues regarding information technology (I own a copy of his book "Computer Crime Law") raises an interesting issue about a 2001 Supreme Court decision (Kyllo v. United States) that prohibited police from using a thermal imaging device on a private home without a warrant. (The police were trying to detect excess heat coming from the roof of a garage, as an indication of lamps being used to grow marijuana inside.) The Court made its decision back in 2001 because thermal imaging devices were 'not in general use' and therefore represented a technology that required a warrant. However, Kerr points out that anyone can now buy such thermal imaging devices for $50 to $150 from Amazon, and that they're advertised as a means of detecting thermal leakage from your home. In light of that, Kerr asks, is the Supreme Court's ruling still sound?"

  

  Read more of this story at Slashdot.