Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[aleajactaest]

hi 24601,

seizure of and access to a device (whether encrypted or unencrypted) from an individual whose behaviour is deemed suspicious is not a case i would call surveillance either.

i am thinking of a definition of the surveillance of data-at-rest meaning the secret capture of private information stored on users' devices which they have not sent to a third party. so if i and other people have family photos stored in our devices, i would think a third party who surreptitiously accessed those photos on a systematic basis without permission was operating a surveillance programme.

i don't think this falls into either of the two categories you offered. but i think it is a valid category.

in my view, a person not behaving in a way that would give rise to reasonable suspicion retains a privacy interest in such information in us law. and the us government should not violate the principles that govern its behaviour.

for me, the really difficult thing is trying to operate a shades of law model in a binary universe. the physicality of a tpm perhaps gives back a little bit of the nuance. but if cypher is right, perhaps not.