Kyllo v. United States case Solution

In Kyllo v. United States (2001), the U.S. Supreme Court held that using a technological device to explore the details of a home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion is a search and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant. The federal prosecutor argued that thermal imaging does not constitute a search because (1) it detects “only heat radiating from the external surface of the house” and therefore there was no entry, and (2) it did not detect private activities occurring in private areas because “everything that was detected was on the outside.” Do you agree with the Court or the Prosecutor? Should what radiates from a private home be protected?