Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

fbi.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 142 posts

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#11

Post by dclowd9901 »

You don't get it, Comey. The problem isn't that you want this information. Obviously you want this information as an investigator of a crime. The problem is, we can't fucking trust you or anyone enough to cross that bridge, because we know if it's there, you're just going to want more. You and every law enforcement agent in the United States has lost our trust. Call it overreach, or overzealous prosecution, high incarceration rates, crooked judges sending kids to jail for kickbacks... fuck if I list any more, I'm going to want to drink some more.

I'd love to live in a world where I trusted a government, which is supposed to be a composition of its people, more than a profit-motivated, self-interested business, but in some weird turn of events, something vastly different has festered in the last 15 years. You blew it, you asshole, you and every other cop.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#12

Post by BWStearns »

I wonder if they did or what would have happened if they had approached Apple in a non-compulsory manner regarding this.

He is right on the fact that the specific task they're seeking Apple to perform is more or less obsolete and will be entirely so shortly so I'm inclined to believe that they're not really going through all this to abuse that specific tool (though the precedent would be worth the fight in order to abuse it).

It would be sad, but entirely his fault, if his prior efforts to set bad faith precedents to end-run consumer encryption alienated industry to the point where productive conversations are no longer possible.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#13

Post by IBM »

bradleyjg wrote: post #7

It should be resolved by the American people deciding how we want to govern ourselves in a world we have never seen before. We shouldn’t drift to a place—or be pushed to a place by the loudest voices—because finding the right place, the right balance, will matter to every American for a very long time. So why are they asking the courts to stretch the 1789 All Writs Act beyond its breaking point, instead of going to C…

The high profile nature of this court case will ultimately be leveraged into getting Congress to take it up if they lose. I think Apple has a very good case for arguing under AWA that the order is too burdensome, and if the court doesn't agree I think they've got a good case to argue that it infringes their First Amendment right.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#14

Post by BWStearns »

mhays wrote: post #10
bradleyjg wrote: post #7

It should be resolved by the American people deciding how we want to govern ourselves in a world we have never seen before. We shouldn’t drift to a place—or be pushed to a place by the loudest voices—because finding the right place, the right balance, will matter to every American for a very long time. So why are they asking the courts to stretch the 1789 All Writs Act beyond its breaking point, instead of going to C…

Except he did go to Congress, and came back with nothing, forcing him to use the AWA. So who is pushing who exactly? And who has a louder voice in criminal justice matters than the FBI?

Hadn't thought about it this way before, but he might be turning to the AWA because a reasonable piece of legislation can't make it through congress.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#16

Post by symlinkk »

> We don’t want to break anyone’s encryption or set a master key loose on the land.

This directly contradicts Tim Cook's statement, in fact he used the same term "master key":

> In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes.

It either is a master key or it isn't.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#17

Post by mirkules »

ryanlol wrote: post #2

>The San Bernardino litigation isn’t about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message. It is about the victims and justice. This is a big fat lie. The way US legal system works makes any case like this about setting a precedent, be it intentional or not. The fact that the FBI director goes and straight up lies about this just supports the theory that it may very well be intentional.

I don't believe this is tied to the San Bernardino case. The topic of weakening encryption has been brewing for the past 6-12 months, and the FBI is using the SB case as a convenient hammer to put a nail in the coffin of encryption.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/28/the-fbi...

http://www.dailydot.com/politics/second-crypto-war-hearing-w...

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbi-has-no-idea-how-to-...

These were all about a year ago.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#18

Post by bradleyjg »

mhays wrote: post #10
bradleyjg wrote: post #7

It should be resolved by the American people deciding how we want to govern ourselves in a world we have never seen before. We shouldn’t drift to a place—or be pushed to a place by the loudest voices—because finding the right place, the right balance, will matter to every American for a very long time. So why are they asking the courts to stretch the 1789 All Writs Act beyond its breaking point, instead of going to C…

Except he did go to Congress, and came back with nothing, forcing him to use the AWA. So who is pushing who exactly? And who has a louder voice in criminal justice matters than the FBI?

Forcing him how? If he came back with nothing, that's his answer. The answer of the American people. Perhaps he should learn what no means.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#19

Post by beedogs »

maratd wrote: post #4
autoreleasepool wrote: post #3

In other words, they're sticking to their story. No mention of the iCloud password reset either.

> No mention of the iCloud password reset either. Exactly. How can you not address that? They necessitated this whole mess through their actions. I try not to ascribe malice to what can easily be explained through incompetence, but to not even mention it? Shameful.

Honestly, I'm ascribing it to malice.

Re: FBI Director Comments on San Bernardino Matter

#20

Post by thetruthseeker1 »

noobermin wrote: post #9

I'll go ahead and say that it sounds extremely sincere and straight-forward, much unlike most official statements I've seen from the FBI. He does suggest that his view is right, but he does the right thing, as apple did, in supporting a public discourse about the so-called balance between privacy and safety. I know many people seem to gravitate to the extremes on every issue, but both Cook and Comey are right in sayi…

Sounds extremely straight forward and sincere(many bad decisions are also taken with utmost sincerity) but I would think it would be a bad idea to provide FBI this ability.

For one, it is forever weakening the security and privacy of your iphone. Bad guys who want to evade the policy officers will do it anyway with encryption systems/software available from any of the non US territories.

Considering that FBI can get significant meta data from telecom providers(who called whom etc), I think this requirement that FBI has gives little gain in security as the upside and comes with a significant downside[ huge loss in privacy].

Post reply on HN