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

Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 196 posts

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#31

Post by ghshephard »

saycheese wrote: post #25
sesutton wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you're running things yourself and control the encryption keys required to access your data, then your service provider can't be compelled to release your data as it's not possible The court can just hold you in contempt until you do[1]. They also probably won't buy "I forgot". [1]: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/child-porn-suspe...

If you delete the data, prior to getting the notice to produce the data and it wasn't deleted in anticipation of such a notice, sure the court could hold you in contempt, but legally you've done nothing wrong. You cannot easily make a third random third-party delete your data.

You might put yourself in a worse position if the court compels you to produce the data, but now you can't. You better be very certain that you are able to prove that you deleted the data prior to any notice, or you might find yourself in for a long jail stay.

This is what a lot of people overlook - when the court compels you to produce evidence, or ill gotten gains, saying ,"I can't" - isn't a legal defense.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#32

Post by adrianN »

cmdrfred wrote: post #10
gjjrfcbugxbhf wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how long before lack of consent is considered incriminating? There are also many different jurisdictions which don't have 5th amendment style protections.

Wouldn't a jurisdiction without 5th amendment protections be unconstitutional?

Depends on the constitution.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#33

Post by [deleted] »

dade_ wrote: post #21

At this point I assume they have a warrant, so I don't understand what the problem is. People should assume their devices can and will be used against them. A much more tricky conversation is when a friend of mine discovered that fragments of his a session with his psychologist recorded by his Android Wear watch.

[deleted]

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#34

Post by ams6110 »

shshhdhs wrote: post #20
tribune wrote: post #16

I own an Echo and this is part of the reason it now sits unplugged. To be honest, it doesn't provide enough value for me to consider potentially compromising the privacy of my home.

Mentioned this in another comment, but they can only reveal voice data IF the victim said "Alexa" when the crime was taking place. If the victim didn't say "Alexa" that day, then there's nothing to reveal.

What if someone else said "Alexa"? What if someone on TV or the radio said "Alexa"?

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#35

Post by IncRnd »

shshhdhs wrote: post #18
koolba wrote: post #3

This should be a lesson to people who don't understand the distinction between "can't" and "won't". If you're running things yourself and control the encryption keys required to access your data, then your service provider can't be compelled to release your data as it's not possible[1][2]. If you're delegating all of that to your service provider and they have access to the raw data, then you are putting all your tru…

They can only reveal voice data IF the victim said "Alexa" when the crime was taking place. If the victim didn't say "Alexa" that day, then there's nothing to reveal. Your example about encryption doesn't make sense in the context of the Echo.

False Positives.

"I'll Let Some" one else discuss how false positives can affect detection.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#36

Post by lucaspiller »

orless wrote: post #27

> Amazon has agreed to hand over data from an Amazon Echo that may have been operating as an alleged murder took place, after the defendant consented. A much more interesting question is if Amazon would have released the data without the defendants conset.

Well Amazon actually refused at first, even when presented with warrants requesting the data, saying that they didn't see how the data would be relevant.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39063113

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#37

Post by Kiro »

koolba wrote: post #3

This should be a lesson to people who don't understand the distinction between "can't" and "won't". If you're running things yourself and control the encryption keys required to access your data, then your service provider can't be compelled to release your data as it's not possible[1][2]. If you're delegating all of that to your service provider and they have access to the raw data, then you are putting all your tru…

I much rather put my trust in them than myself. I am clueless about security.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#38

Post by IncRnd »

gjjrfcbugxbhf wrote: post #5
gtirloni wrote: post #2

> after the defendant consented

But how long before lack of consent is considered incriminating? There are also many different jurisdictions which don't have 5th amendment style protections.

It will be a long time in the jurisdiction of this case before constitutional protection against self-incrimination is stripped.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#39

Post by koolba »

ghshephard wrote: post #31
saycheese wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you delete the data, prior to getting the notice to produce the data and it wasn't deleted in anticipation of such a notice, sure the court could hold you in contempt, but legally you've done nothing wrong. You cannot easily make a third random third-party delete your data.

You might put yourself in a worse position if the court compels you to produce the data, but now you can't. You better be very certain that you are able to prove that you deleted the data prior to any notice, or you might find yourself in for a long jail stay. This is what a lot of people overlook - when the court compels you to produce evidence, or ill gotten gains, saying ,"I can't" - isn't a legal defense.

> This is what a lot of people overlook - when the court compels you to produce evidence, or ill gotten gains, saying ,"I can't" - isn't a legal defense.

We're getting closer and closer to testing that. IANAL but I'd imagine that some combination of the 4th and 5th amendments should cover that situation. The onus would be upon the prosecutor to prove that you destroyed the evidence after the fact.

As a general rule, one does not have to prove they didn't commit a crime, the prosecutor has to prove that they did. Where this gets murky is if a judge orders you to present the non-existent data as contempt of court may apply.

Re: Amazon to hand over Echo audio from alleged murder after defendant consents

#40

Post by izacus »

phantarch wrote: post #7

How is echo audio data substantially different than something like a tape recorder that was live in the man's home? What about a cell phone that was on a call at the time of the alleged murder? I definitely understand wanting to ensure reasonable privacy for users, but to me it feels an awful lot of a stretch to say that the echo is off-limits in this case.

> How is echo audio data substantially different than something like a tape recorder that was live in the man's home? What about a cell phone that was on a call at the time of the alleged murder?

It's not about the technology - a tape recorder isn't on the whole time while it's in your house and won't get accidentally turned on by you speaking. Alexa is listening the whole time and gets triggered even for non-standard phrases essentially sending snippets of conversations to Amazon you didn't explicitly plan to.

It's very very very rare that people press REC on a tape recorder and forget about it. It's very common for Alexa to trigger on phrases that aren't meant for it.

Post reply on HN