For instance, the ACLU pointed out that encrypted smartphone apps like Signal and WhatsApp are free and easily downloadable from major app stores, while Apple has built encrypted voice, video and text communications apps into its operating system.
The Aug. 3 kickoff of the so-called multistakeholder process stems from a Feb. 15 presidential memo that sought to build best practices around those particular issues with the NTIA in charge of developing a framework to use drones in U.S. airspace.
The legislation is in response to what some government officials are saying is a new wave of domestic terrorism, including plots and attacks by lone wolves inspired by the the terrorist group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or by white supremacists such as the recent attack on a South Carolina church that killed nine black people.
Attorneys for the Border Patrol agent, Lonnie Swartz, had argued that José Antonio Elena Rodríguez was not protected under the U.S. Constitution because he was a Mexican citizen on Mexican soil at the time of the shooting.
No computer system will be flawless, ACLU said in a letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration suggesting three ways to keep access out of the wrong hands.
The ACLU has called for rules that limit law enforcement agencies' use of drones when collecting evidence of wrongdoing, for emergencies or other uses where there's no reason to think it would invade privacy.
The changes reflect the legal pressure brought about by a 2010 lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of 13 Americans, who challenged their inclusion on the list.
At issue is the Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques, which uses behavior detection officers to detect passenger behaviors that may be indicative of stress, fear or deception.
The abilities of governments to protect citizens are dwindling as cyber threats increase and jurisdiction over such matters lacks clarity, according to the authors of a new book.
A group of civil liberties, public interest and other groups are arguing that the government violated the Fourth Amendment by obtaining cellphone location data of two defendants without getting a warrant in a case being heard by the Sixth Court of Appeals.