Nice idea. However...
The courts will be much less willing to stretch the constitution (a “living document”) to protect rights that Conservatives value (monitors in private computers == quartering soldiers) than they were to stretch the “living document” to protect rights that Liberals value (pornography == free speech, abortion == privacy).
The Supreme Court already ruled that agents of the state ARE covered by the 3rd amendment. We just have to argue that these computer malware are the 21st century version of virtual agents of the state. After all, this thread is about updating the rules for modern realities.
From Wikipedia Third Amendment to the United States Constitution :
The Third Amendment has been invoked in a few instances as helping establish an implicit right to privacy in the Constitution. Justice William O. Douglas used the amendment along with others in the Bill of Rights as a partial basis for the majority decision in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which cited the Third Amendment as implying a belief that an individual's home should be free from agents of the state.
-PJ