Geek Squad and the FBI

[Foo]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/2 ... onship-fbi

Makes you wonder what all is going on out there.

[Dream]

They've had a disclosure for years that you sign when you drop off your pc for repairs that says if their techs find illegal material on the device they will contact the authorities. I don't think it's ever really been a secret.

I find it amusing that so many people take their pc to geek squad, knowing full well there is or was kiddie porn on it, and think the tech isn't going to notice the files or can't recover them because they dropped them in the recycle bin and cleared it or they aren't a part of the problem the computer is being brought in for, dude, people snoop. Though, I'm thrilled that there are people out there doing this shit that are that stupid and companies like Best Buy are taking advantage of that stupidity to do some good in the world. Kudos to them. (On the flip side, I know of one instance where an employee was copying legal homemade porn off of computers that were brought in, he did get found out and fired eventually, I doubt the customers ever found out cause I'm pretty sure it would've made national news.)

Don't do illegal shit and you don't have to worry about who's monitoring your electronics.

[Foo]

The issue is warrantless searches. If the FBI is paying people to nose around and be tipsters when they have no right to be searching around, that is an issue.

They don't have the right to burn the constitution and then say it is ok because they were looking for kiddie porn. Legit techs would not be looking through photo and video files while doing legitimate Geek Squad work. If some 18 year old has pictures of his legal age girlfriend naked, it is an issue that GS would be looking and secondly that they would be making judgment calls about calling the FBI. Then, the FBI needs to get a warrant BEFORE searching, not after.

Every child porn hustler can drop dead, but we can't violate the rights of others to go after them.

[Dream]

You get that when you drop off your device to them you have to sign a thing saying you consent to them going through your files, software, hardware, etc without limitations, right?

It's not an illegal search if you consent to it, and they make you consent to it before they will work on your device.

If you don't want to give them that access, use a different service that doesn't require you to consent to full access or learn to fix it yourself.

[showa58taro]

If they say you agree to them searching by definition that’s a legal search.

[Tiggnutz]

It states in the article Best Buy informs customers of their policies before doing work so good job Best Buy. And if you are that fucking stupid to give it to them anyway than you are better off in custody.

[zombie]

it does sound like a violation. but you have to consent before they can do anything. it's like the cop coming to your door and asking you to let him in without a warrant. vs. him barging in to your home. one is legal, the other is not. so yeah.

[Tiggnutz]

If you cleaned and detailed cars and found pictures of child porn in the glove box of one of your customers wouldn't you feel obligated to alert the authorities? What's the difference?

[zombie]

If you cleaned and detailed cars and found pictures of child porn in the glove box of one of your customers wouldn't you feel obligated to alert the authorities? What's the difference?

the difference there is consent. if the guy consented to a search of his car, while you cleaned and detailed the car, then there would be no difference really.

i don't like over reach and treating people as if they are already guilty, but if you consent to that kind of treatment, that is all on you. if you are actually guilty, and you're stupid enough to consent to a search that would otherwise be illegal, yay.

[showa58taro]

If you’re annoyed at pedophiles being caught, you need to re-examine your values.

[zombie]

on the flipside, if you are annoyed at innocent people being treated as if they may be pedophiles, your values are in the right place.

[Foo]

Several problems with the assumptions made here.

1. That the person is clearly giving consent to be searched. Slipping some language into a document someone is signing for another purpose is generally frowned upon. If someone is having their RAM upgraded, it is a pretty big leap to think they are also consenting to have all their private videos and photos viewed. How many apps or programs have you installed without reading the entire text? Agreements for credit cards or bank accounts? It is normal and common to rely on both reasonable expectations and a summary by a professional. Assumptions are part of our every day lives.

2. That Best Buy is allowed to be acting as an undisclosed agent of the government, accepting monetary rewards in exchange for information.

3. That this is about catching pedofiles and not protecting everyone's rights.

[Foo]

If you cleaned and detailed cars and found pictures of child porn in the glove box of one of your customers wouldn't you feel obligated to alert the authorities? What's the difference?

Did the authorities buddy up to you and offer you rewards to search people's cars beforehand? There is a big difference between being a good citizen and conducting illegal searches.

Also, what happens after you alert authorities matters. Did they go and get a warrant? Or did they come and search the car without the owner's knowledge, look at everything, and then decide what to do?

[Foo]

And this is a digital world. While certain things people do are not smart, you can't start punishing them by invading their privacy and then hide behind disclaimers. I am certain the notion that Best Buy employees have access to your private photos is downplayed during the sales pitch to perform computer service.

[Foo]

This sort of thing came up when I worked on the census. The enumerators would say, "What if I am standing in the doorway and see a crime?", "What if I see child abuse?", "What if someone is being kidnapped?", "What if someone is cooking meth?", "What if some crazy guy has all sorts of guns everywhere?".

The answer was always the same. Determine if someone is in imminent danger and if so, call the police. Otherwise, you are not law enforcement. You have no idea what that person is allowed to have or not have or the entire situation.

The reason for this was because anything less than imminent danger risked the entire operation. If word started getting around that we were looking for crimes, the whole dynamic would change, and potentially make it more dangerous to do.

[Dream]

And this is a digital world. While certain things people do are not smart, you can't start punishing them by invading their privacy and then hide behind disclaimers. I am certain the notion that Best Buy employees have access to your private photos is downplayed during the sales pitch to perform computer service.

considering I've been there exactly once for computer repair and knew of the policy off hand tells me that it isn't that downplayed. They outright told me that if they find anything illegal on my computer they turn it over to the police. (FBI was never mentioned.)


Again, ignorance of what you signed does not get you a free pass. You are supposed to use your own due diligence to know what you're signing. Just cause you skip ahead and sign without reading and/or understanding the document, doesn't invalidate your signature and consent. Everyone skips the EULA, but they are still held to the clauses within it whether they read it or not. It's no difference. Ignorance is not a defense.

Until you brought it up as if it's some big shady secret going on, I thought this had been pretty common knowledge for at least the past 16 years.

[Foo]

And this is a digital world. While certain things people do are not smart, you can't start punishing them by invading their privacy and then hide behind disclaimers. I am certain the notion that Best Buy employees have access to your private photos is downplayed during the sales pitch to perform computer service.

considering I've been there exactly once for computer repair and knew of the policy off hand tells me that it isn't that downplayed. They outright told me that if they find anything illegal on my computer they turn it over to the police. (FBI was never mentioned.)


Again, ignorance of what you signed does not get you a free pass. You are supposed to use your own due diligence to know what you're signing. Just cause you skip ahead and sign without reading and/or understanding the document, doesn't invalidate your signature and consent. Everyone skips the EULA, but they are still held to the clauses within it whether they read it or not. It's no difference. Ignorance is not a defense.

Until you brought it up as if it's some big shady secret going on, I thought this had been pretty common knowledge for at least the past 16 years.

A freedom of information document had to be filed by third parties to learn the FBI had such a relationship going on, and was just disclosed. If you knew about that aspect of it for 16 years, you are ahead of the game.

Actually, ignorance of what people are signing is used all the time. In 15+ years of real estate, I have never met the person who read and understood every document they signed at their closing. People rely on established norms and professionals to explain it to them. When one of those fail, then they do often get off the hook. Established norms are necessary for society to function, so there is nothing wrong with that.

There is a wide chasm between "I stumbled across something I believe to be illegal and reported it to the authorities" and "I am a paid informant for the FBI". Different standards at play. Also, stumbling upon a crime and searching for one are way different.

[zombie]

if this causes change of bestbuy's policy, cool. like i said, it does sound like a violation. just a legal one, as of now. but this is the world we live in. no one gave a crap at all, when i mentioned that the president of the united states is even advocating to act on things before going to due process. so yeah.

[Foo]

if this causes change of bestbuy's policy, cool. like i said, it does sound like a violation. just a legal one, as of now. but this is the world we live in. no one gave a crap at all, when i mentioned that the president of the united states is even advocating to act on things before going to due process. so yeah.

It is only going to get worse. I tried to bring it up in the context of mental health and gun control, but no one cared.

The ends justify the means, I suppose. Look at all the accusations that are leading to people losing jobs. We can take away rights if it advances our agenda, apparently.

Look at Obamacare forcing people to buy insurance. No problem, because it was pushing the agenda.

[zombie]

if this causes change of bestbuy's policy, cool. like i said, it does sound like a violation. just a legal one, as of now. but this is the world we live in. no one gave a crap at all, when i mentioned that the president of the united states is even advocating to act on things before going to due process. so yeah.

It is only going to get worse. I tried to bring it up in the context of mental health and gun control, but no one cared.

The ends justify the means, I suppose. Look at all the accusations that are leading to people losing jobs. We can take away rights if it advances our agenda, apparently.

Look at Obamacare forcing people to buy insurance. No problem, because it was pushing the agenda.

agreed. you even argued against me, when it related to gun control. and yeah, it's going to get worse.