161–170 of 196 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need to trust the code on the server -- that's the point. You can compile the client code yourself. In fact, until recently you had to compile the client code yourself.
Hey you guys provide binaries now? News to me! Was never an issue till now though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comparing it to a tape recorder is interesting. If we consider this device to be the same as a tape recorder for the purpose of admission of evidence: (1) In some states, by having this device and turning it on you have now indeed consented for the conversation to be recorded - which would alarm most users (2) In other states, it is illegal for the device to be functioning without consent of all who are conversing, a…
> but on the other hand it makes me think of compelling you to give up encryption keys because well, they're not "papers" like the 4th amendment refers to (an argument which HAS been used before). That makes me think, what if I wrote the keys down on a piece of paper, and then told you I always copy it from the paper because I don't remember it. Then would I be protected by saying that my papers are protected and the…
This is a non-issue. The audio Amazon receives is from only-just-barely-before the wakeword up to and through the command or timeout expiration. Yes, it's possible that the defendants cat meowed right before the murder and it sounded like "Alexa". But it seems incredibly unlikely. Prosecutors are just trying to cover every base but the likelihood that this will yield anything is very low.
There are too many checkers players in a chess world. They're attempting to establish the precedent today. Tomorrow(figurative, not literal), when such devices send everything to the cloud to be processed "To reduce false positives", there will be much more data to mine. I won't have one of these devices in my house. I won't have an xbone in my house for the same reason. Today, they're not much of a threat to privacy…
Wikipedia leak today claims hacks for Smart TVs. Perhaps in the future, basic things like light bulbs aren't even usable without an Echo-like device.
Bet on everything being recorded everywhere, at some point. Just look at what the satellite tech companies are doing now. If you are doing something off in a far remote area, you are still being surveilled, recorded in perpetuity. At this point I'm more concerned about AI actors than any government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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,…
There's lots of case history where people are faced with a court order compelling them to return ill-gotten gains, and when they claim "I can't do it, I don't have the money." - they are found guilty of contempt of court if the court believes otherwise. Burden of evidence is not on the court to prove you do have the money, just as in this case, the burden wouldn't be on them to prove you can retrieve the data....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In Tarsnap I might take this to an extreme — in addition to the aforementioned encryption, I encourage users to read the tarsnap source code rather than trusting that I got everything right You still have to trust that what's running on your machine and on the servers is compiled directly from the source you have access to, right?
You don't need to trust the code on the server -- that's the point. You can compile the client code yourself. In fact, until recently you had to compile the client code yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are too many checkers players in a chess world. They're attempting to establish the precedent today. Tomorrow(figurative, not literal), when such devices send everything to the cloud to be processed "To reduce false positives", there will be much more data to mine. I won't have one of these devices in my house. I won't have an xbone in my house for the same reason. Today, they're not much of a threat to privacy…
You may not have a choice, if everyone's phones are doing it. Wikipedia leak today claims hacks for Smart TVs. Perhaps in the future, basic things like light bulbs aren't even usable without an Echo-like device. Bet on everything being recorded everywhere, at some point. Just look at what the satellite tech companies are doing now. If you are doing something off in a far remote area, you are still being surveilled, r…
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.
> people should assume What I assume is that the bill of rights will not be subverted just because I use technology. The right to not be subject to search and right to not self incrimate.
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…
Except Amazon refused until defendant said it was OK. It's often easier to coerce single person rotting jail on contempt charges than a huge corporation. Point being, like everything, it is not as b/w, not as simple as you imply.
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.
Your phone can record, video too. Letting fear of privacy boogyman control your life is a sad waste of living.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need to trust the code on the server -- that's the point. You can compile the client code yourself. In fact, until recently you had to compile the client code yourself.
Though, of course, this still means trusting the compiler : https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thomp...