&gt; A search warrant doesn&#x27;t require me to create a new capability that did not exist before.<p>It might, depending on the analytical outcome of the three-factor test introduced in the _New York Telephone_ case.  (This case was decided before compelled pen register assistance was prescribed by Congressional legislation.)<p>The case itself is illustrative and enlightening: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;supreme.justia.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;federal&#x2F;us&#x2F;434&#x2F;159&#x2F;case.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;supreme.justia.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;federal&#x2F;us&#x2F;434&#x2F;159&#x2F;case.htm...</a><p>&quot;The power conferred by the [All Writs] Act extends, under appropriate circumstances, to persons who, though not parties to the original action or engaged in wrongdoing, are in a position to frustrate the implementation of a court order or the proper administration of justice...&quot;<p>The factors are:<p>(1) whether the third party is &quot;so far removed as a third party from the underlying controversy that its assistance could not permissibly be compelled by the order of the court&quot;<p>(2) Whether the burden placed on the third party is &quot;unreasonable&quot;<p>(3) Whether the assistance is &quot;essential to the fulfillment of the purpose&quot; of the warrant<p>It&#x27;s unfortunate that Hacker News isn&#x27;t commented upon by more attorneys, and that most news articles don&#x27;t link directly to the legal filings in these cases; much confusion and false assumptions about the law could be clarified.