Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs
Mark Rasch, 2005-02-08

Why a Supreme Court decision on canine-assisted roadside searches opens the door to a new regime of Internet surveillance.

Expand all | Post comment

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-08
Anonymous (1 replies)

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-09
Mark D. Rasch (5 replies)

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-10
Anonymous (1 replies)

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-10
Anonymous

Kind of off 2005-02-10
MattJordan

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-10
Anonymous (1 replies)

Logic a bit flawed 2005-02-11
Anonymous

Weak analysis 2005-02-08
Anonymous (1 replies)

Weak analysis 2005-02-09
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)

That makes no sense, Mark. 2005-02-09
Anonymous

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-08
Anonymous (2 replies)

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-10
MDH (1 replies)

In Mark's argument, the technology used to obtain the evidence is not important. The dog is interchangeable with the IR goggles and the parabolic dish etc...

What is important - is a citizen's right to EXPECT privacy. The fellow driving has a right to EXPECT that what is in his trunk will remain private.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/297/30494#30494

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-10
Anonymous

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs - Where is it private v. public 2005-02-10
Anonymous

Does not follow (non sequiter) 2005-02-09
Anonymous

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-09
Michael Britt

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-09
A.W. Montville (1 replies)

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-10
Anonymous

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-09
Anonymous

Of Dog Sniffs and Packet Sniffs 2005-02-09
Anonymous (1 replies)

On Unreasonable Searches 2005-02-09
Mark Rasch (7 replies)

On Unreasonable Searches 2005-02-09
Bob Radvanovsky

On Unreasonable Searches 2005-02-09
Anonymous

On Unreasonable Searches 2005-02-10
Anonymous (1 replies)