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

Ordinary vision is remote sensing as well. If the "container" cloaks the criminal activity, then to search the "container" requires probable cause. This becomes more difficult when the "container" itself may give rise to suspicion (consider a bulky overcoat on a hot day).

If there is a "window", then officers may peek. If the closed container is not hermetically sealed and decontaminated, then you must consider this a "window".

So, I think if the concealment is not in itself suspicious, then complete concealment is probably sufficient to insure right to protection of privacy.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/297/30549#30549

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)

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