Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Submission + - EPIC Files Motion About Ignored Body Scanner Ruling (

OverTheGeicoE writes: The Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a motion in court yesterday regarding the court's ignored year-old ruling on EPIC vs. DHS. EPIC is asking the court to require DHS to start taking public comment within 60 days or, as an alternative, forbid DHS from using body scanners in primary airport screening altogether. If the court orders the latter, that would give EPIC what it originally sought in its lawsuit. Meanwhile, for what it's worth, the related petition on has a little more than half the signatures it needs to get an official 'response.' The signing period ends on August 9.

Submission + - Court Denies EPIC's Rehearing Request, Awards Fees (

OverTheGeicoE writes: The Electronic Privacy Information Center posted a news release about the DC Circuit Court awarding them attorney's fees yesterday. They are to receive $21,482 in attorneys fees for an open government lawsuit against DHS that ultimately released documents about DHS' airport body scanner program. EPIC used these released documents in EPIC v. DHS, another lawsuit that attempts to end the use of airport body scanners. At the end of an e-mailed version of this news release (EPIC Alert 18.18, not yet posted on the Web), EPIC states that "EPIC requested an en banc review of the court's decision not to suspend, but, on September 12, 2011, the court declined the request." Is this the end of EPIC v. DHS, or does this simply open the door for an appeal to the Supreme Court?
United States

Submission + - Cell Location Data Protected by US 4th Amendment (

OverTheGeicoE writes: The Electronic Privacy Information Center reports that a US Federal Judge has ruled cell phone location data is protected by the fourth amendment. The government wanted Verizon Wireless to turn over hundreds of days worth of position data for an undisclosed suspect's cell phone without a warrant. In his ruling (PDF), Judge Garaufis states that "The fiction that the vast majority of the American population consents to warrantless government access to the records of a significant share of their movements by 'choosing' to carry a cell phone must be rejectedIn light of drastic developments in technology, the Fourth Amendment doctrine must evolve to preserve cell-phone user's reasonable expectation of privacy in cumulative cell-site-location records."

The Register of the UK also has a story with a more European perspective.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never tell people how to do things. Tell them WHAT to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity. -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.