6-Month-Old E-Mails Easy Pickings for Police
The outdated 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act considers e-mail "abandoned" and searchable if it's stored for more than 180 days on a server. Larry Greenemeier reports
SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Tech
Existing privacy laws are disconnected from the ways we communicate electronically today. The FBI made headlines again recently for its lobbying efforts to make the Web easier to wiretap. And Congress is trying to figure out whether a law that predates the Web by several years can protect access to your old e-mails.
The 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act was mostly aimed at protecting digital messages in transit. The Act existed before the widespread use of email and of massive computer memory that could easily store decades’ worth of messages. The law thus considers information that such as e-mail “abandoned” if it’s stored for more than 180 days on a service provider’s server. If law enforcement wants access to an abandoned e-mail, it only has to claim need for an investigation.
A little good news. The Justice Department supports requiring police to get a warrant to read your e-mail. Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy agrees, and is trying to get a law passed to make that official.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Legal protection would be a lot better than picking through and deleting years of forgotten messages in your personal inbox.
—Larry Greenemeier
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
