For those who though nothing wrong of that sniffing-dog fishing expedition

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/297

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs
Why a Supreme Court decision on canine-assisted roadside searches opens the door to a new regime of Internet surveillance.
By Mark Rasch Feb 08 2005 11:21AM PT

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is supposed to be the one that protects people and their "houses, places and effects" against "unreasonable searches." Forty-two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court held that attaching a listening device to a public pay phone violated this provision because the Constitution protects people, not places, and because the Fourth Amendment prohibits warrantless searches without probable cause if the target enjoys a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court effectively decimated this principle in a case that could have a profound impact on privacy rights online.

The case, decided by the court on January 24th, had nothing to do with the Information Superhighway, but rather an ordinary interstate highway in Illinois. Roy Caballes was pulled over by the Illinois State Police for speeding. While one officer was writing him a ticket, another officer in another patrol car came by with a drug sniffing dog.

There was absolutely no reason to believe that Caballes was a drug courier -- no profile, no suspicious activity, no large amounts of cash. The driver could have been a soccer mom with a minivan filled with toddlers. Under established Supreme Court precedent, while the cops could have looked in the window to see what was in "plain view," the officers had neither probable cause nor reasonable suspicion to search Caballes' car, trunk, or person.

(...)

Now here is where things get dicey for the Internet. In upholding the dog's sniff-search of the trunk, the Supreme Court held that it did not "compromise any legitimate interest in privacy." Why? Because, according to the court, "any interest in possessing contraband cannot be deemed 'legitimate.'" The search was acceptable to the court because it could only reveal the possession of contraband, the concealment of which "compromises no legitimate privacy interest."

More at link.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

1. Maybe the mods should move this to GD? (nt)