The “unlawful search and seizure” amendment? Why would that apply here?
The “unlawful search and seizure” amendment? Why would that apply here?
replaced Google’s Network Time Protocol servers with NTP Pool Project
In the the context of degoogling and privacy, NTP would seem way down on the list of concerns.
What’s the importance of calling out NTP? Is it just to emphasize the point?
Yes and no. The people that truly keep the lights on to critical systems I think are more insulated. I deal with active directory (and azure to an extent). I’m one of two engineers that are attuned to what is going on in AD in a 65k+ staffed company. I do other things than AD, but it needs care and feeding.
AD is going to stick around for a lot longer and may end up being in that cobol state where companies have it for critical things but there are few who truly understand how to work it.
Everyone else may end up in a DevOps-esque role. Then you have the scope of the industry too. I think this article overblows the premise it puts forth.
You are implying that any data gathered will be delivered to the government upon request (unsure if you are implying with or without a warrant). If you can show me from this article, or even this case, regarding this privacy case that that happened, then yes I agree with you and the fourth amendment applies.
But this issue is between private entities which generally precludes amendments from being applicable. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the infotainment systems collected and stored personal data without consent and violated Washington’s Privacy Act.