To be clear, tech companies provide subscriber metadata (e.g., billing address, real name) with a court order or subpoena. They provide actual user data (e.g., voicemail) only with a warrant.
Or has something changed since the last time I requested user data from a tech company by subpoena? Or are you talking about intelligence collection as distinct from law enforcement?
Also worth noting that LE frequently has PC without having a warrant (for example: every time they ask a magistrate for a warrant and secure one, we can infer they had PC first). In fact they perform many searches with only PC (see: exigency, eventual discovery, etc).
It would be more apt to say any subscriber metadata Apple knows, the FBI can know without a warrant.
Outrageous and (obviously) unconfirmed claims. But again, and as an American whose private data should never fall under the purview of FISA or FAA or any other IC intelligence gathering activities, I don't seriously doubt domestic US spying/surveillance capabilities.
That LE has to feign the need for a warrant should the need arise to make lawfully admissible that which they already know and are in possession of is the most likely scenario. Encryption really is the only safeguard.
Or has something changed since the last time I requested user data from a tech company by subpoena? Or are you talking about intelligence collection as distinct from law enforcement?
Also worth noting that LE frequently has PC without having a warrant (for example: every time they ask a magistrate for a warrant and secure one, we can infer they had PC first). In fact they perform many searches with only PC (see: exigency, eventual discovery, etc).
It would be more apt to say any subscriber metadata Apple knows, the FBI can know without a warrant.