Divorce lawyers subpoenas as search engine privacy threat: Google, Yahoo, others [priv]

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Lin, Herb" <HLin () nas edu>
Date: May 10, 2005 8:39:07 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net, Ip ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
Subject: RE: [IP] Divorce lawyers subpoenas as search engine privacy  
threat: Google, Yahoo, others [priv]


So maybe someone can answer this-

IF Google provided the user with the capability of erasing his/her
search history, wouldn't this take care of the problem entirely?

If not, why not?

If so, I have a question for Google-folk on this list-- why not provide
that capability?

Herb




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ip () v2 listbox com [mailto:owner-ip () v2 listbox com] On Behalf
Of David Farber
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:02 PM
To: Ip ip
Subject: [IP] Divorce lawyers subpoenas as search engine privacy threat:
Google, Yahoo, others [priv]



Begin forwarded message:

From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Date: May 10, 2005 4:54:56 PM EDT
To: politech () politechbot com
Subject: [Politech] Divorce lawyers subpoenas as search engine
privacy threat: Google, Yahoo, others [priv]


Previous Politech message:
http://www.politechbot.com/2005/04/25/be-wary-of/



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [Politech] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal
history"feature [priv]
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:53:03 -0700
From: Stefanie Olsen <Stefanie.Olsen () cnet com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>

To be fair, the same concerns exist with any "account" based search
engine like Yahoo or ISPs like Earthlink. Now, I think there's a real
concern there and the issues need to be addressed in the search
industry, but they all need to answer to them.

Stefanie



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal
history" feature [priv]
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 07:22:13 -0400
From: Eric Freedman <Eric.M.Freedman () hofstra edu>
To: <declan () well com>

-Of course it could be relevant in a family law case, and not
necessarily in any way suggesting the slightest impropriety.  For
example, suppose the husband resists giving custody to the wife on
the theory that, despite what  she now says, she  has a long-term
plan to move to another city and take a higher-paying job there.
Certainly if she has been browsing sites relating to that city and
its residential real estate, that would be relevant and any judge
would order the information disclosed.  After all, there would be
nothing  wrong with the husband's lawyer asking about all this at the
wife's deposition. -E.




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [Politech] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal
history"feature [priv]
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:18:17 -0700
From: Ray Everett-Church <ray () privacyclue com>
To: 'Declan McCullagh' <declan () well com>, <politech () politechbot com>

Declan:

Nobody seems to have read close enough on this one. Both Google's VP of
Engineering, and the Privacy FAQ for My Search History make pretty
clear that
they *already* store all of those search details, even if you ask
them to be
deleted. Quotes, cites, and details at:

http://www.privacyclue.com/index.php/20050421/google-launches-new-
privacy-contro
versy/

Regards,
-Ray
http://www.privacyclue.com



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal
history" feature [priv]
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:47:36 -0400
From: J.D. Abolins <jabolins () meydaonline com>
Reply-To: jabolins () meydaonline com
Organization: Meyda Online
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
References: <426DAE46.4080905 () well com>

Divorce case are not only type where saved Google searches would be of
interest. There are various types of cases dealing with information
and technology issues where Google searches might be sought.

Intellectual property disputes might hinge upon prior  knowledge of a
work and the searches might show a possibility that the defendant had
such knowledge.

Computer and network abuse cases might involve Google search for
tools, methods, and vulnerabilities. In, say, a workplace computer
system sabotage case, an employee's outside of work searches for info
on the particular system and software's vulnerabilities,
testing/administration/hacking tools, and other information might
show the defendant had the means to commit the act. The info from
Google's servers would supplement any info found at the workplace
systems.

As there are many ways to use Google searches for network security
vulnerability testing, I can see the risks of storing such searches
should one ever be accused of a computer crime or of some civil tort.
Not likely that a smart criminal is going to use the Google personal
history feature. Some well meaning people figuring they are doing
nothing wrong and have nothing to worry about might stumble into a
situation where the info can be a problem.

The personal search info saved on Google systems  may include saves
from computers not readily available for discovery or search &
seizure. (E.g.; from cybercafes, hotel computers, etc.)

The standard "I am not a lawyer" disclaimer applies top the above
comments.

J.D. Abolins





-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [Politech] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal
history"feature [priv]
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:34:15 -0400
From: Putnam, Charles <charles.putnam () unh edu>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>

Declan,

I think you're probably right to think that search histories and
internet viewing practices could play a role in divorce.

I can't vouch for the site or the stats, but this link contains some
interesting numbers that suggest that a spouse's search preferences
might come up in states with divorce for "cause" or in matters of
property division/support or child custody:

http://www.divorcewizards.com/divorcestats_porn.html.

I'm less sure that search histories become the grist for criminal
litigation as often. "Possession" has to be proven in the child porn
cases.  In the luring of minors for sex cases there tends to be plenty
of evidence generated from the child's [or detective's] computer, the
presence of the defendant and the toys/aids that he brings along.  I
suppose browsing patterns might help to prove "intent" in terrorism
cases, but my sense is that the same probable cause that gets the Google
info also gets the target's computer.  In some states there might is a
lower standard of proof to get something like "toll" records, but my
sense is that courts have resisted allowing investigators to get access
to digital information with "communicative" content [like e-mails &
search histories] using toll records statutes. In some cases it might be
possible to "chain back" from Google searches to show probable cause
that a person of investigative interest would be likely to possess
relevant information on a particular computer, but that suggests both a
level of investigative information developed from traditional sources
and the oversight of a judge or grand jury.

It's also possible to envision creative defense counsel employing a
version of the "twinkie" defense using search histories as well ["my
client is a sex-addicted, Internet crazed individual, your Honor, he
couldn't form the required mental state to commit the crime of
________."].

Regards,
Charles T. Putnam
Co-Director
Justiceworks
208 Huddleston Hall
University of New Hampshire
(603) 862-7041




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [IP] Privacy tip: be wary of Google's "personal history"
feature [priv] (fwd)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:52:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: W.B. McNamara <whitney () absono us>
To: declan () well com


Hey there -

I know that you know, but since I forgot to copy you directly on this
and it doesn't look like it made IP, just wanted to send it along.

The note is a hair flip...possibly condescending...but my base concern
is the attention being paid to potential privacy concerns associated
with Google (because Google is the big deal of the moment), at the
expense of broader concerns.

When considered in the context of what other for-profit companies are
doing or planning to do, to say nothing of what many governments are
doing, Google's search history is an example of a *type* of privacy
issue that we should be increasingly concerned about, not an isolated
incident.

If Google killed the idea tomorrow, Amazon/A9 would still be doing
something similar with arguably broader implications, as would Yahoo and
Microsoft...and then there's the Patriot Act...

Again, I know you know, but just wanted to get it out of my system. :)

Thanks,
Whit


--
W.B. McNamara
whitney () absono us
http://absono.us


_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as hlin () nas edu
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/