It should be clarified that this second condition adds a significant layer in relation to the criteria set out in section 23 of the Ordinance for the Granting of a Search Order in Premises. While a search warrant in premises is generally subject to prima facie evidence as to its necessity only, a judge hearing a request for a search warrant on a computer has the complex task of balancing between a person's right to privacy and the public interest in advancing the investigation."
Thus in paragraph 49:
"The rule set forth in the Ordinance, according to which a search may not be conducted except in accordance with a judicial order, is unambiguous...".
It was therefore determined that penetration into computer material would be done by a judicial order and there was no one else, and that the rules of exceptions detailed in the Searches chapter of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, which permit a search without a warrant (such as sections 25 and 26), do not apply to penetration of computer material. This is due to the great and unique sensitivity of the information stored on computers and the severe and unique violation of the right to privacy involved in searching for them (Additional Criminal Hearing 1062/21 Jonathan Urich v. State of Israel (11.1.2022)).
When it comes to informed consent to penetration of a computer, such as a smartphone or security cameras, as an independent source of authority to carry out the search in the absence of any other source of authority, the situation is different and opinions about it are divided. In this context, see what was said in the explanatory notes to the proposed amendment bill Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Arrest and Search) (No. 11) (Search and Seizure of Computer Material), 5765-2005:
"A search and seizure of a computer is often a central tool in the criminal investigation process, both when the computer system is a tool for committing the offense, and when the computer system contains central information for conducting an investigation. However, searching and seizing a computer may severely harm the privacy of the computer holder and the privacy of third parties.... In light of the complex system of checks and balances regarding computer search and seizure, the legislature established back in 1995 with the enactment of the Computers Law , 5755-1995.... Special laws for these situations. Regarding a search of a computer and computer material, it was determined that the search should not be carried out except by a judge's order that explicitly states the permission to penetrate computer material and the terms and purposes of the search."