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

NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

wmur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 185 posts

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#171

Post by kabdib »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #74
saagarjha wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't work for client-side encryption, though–I cannot be forced to give up my keys or passwords.

Client-side encryption doesn't always solve this. Two main exceptions: First, if the encryption is unlocked by a physical device that doesn't require a memorized code, or by your personal biometrics, they can get that without violating your right against self-incrimination. Second, if they know what information is being hidden by the encryption and just need a copy of it to prove their case, the foregone conclusion d…

There was a recent successful challenge to the "foregone conclusion" bit (in Florida?)

I'd be surprised if that decision survives another level of appeals court.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#172

Post by wpdev_63 »

wpdev_63 wrote: post #15

This isn't really a shocker. They have been known since 2006[0] that the police(+TLA's) can use your cellphone as a eavesdropping tool. The biggest problem I fear is that this will become socially acceptable in US as it has with the authoritarian gov't in China. [0]: https://www.cnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdr...

EDIT: Why is my comment being downvoted? And why can't I edit it?

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#173

Post by mcny »

blattimwind wrote: post #110
mcny wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. We talk about the "identity theft" problem here quite a bit. One time someone wrote about how there is no such thing as identity theft. If someone persuaded a bank to give them money by pretending it was me, the thief didn't steal anything from me. The bank gave the thief money and should try to recover it themselves. I'm not a part of that equation. I think it is stupid to establish any kind of causality ba…

> What's next? Private diaries as evidence that I killed someone? Well if your diary contains perpetrator's knowledge then obviously yes? Even if not, it may count as circumstantial evidence.

I anal but in my not so humble opinion it can at best establish motive not that I did it.

I've been hearing recently about how the forensic "science" we allow in the court room isn't all that scientific either. I think our law enforcement and our prosecutors are just too lazy. I'd not mind so much if they let criminals free but it seems they will try to frame someone who is plausible and let "science", "evidence", and "experts" do the talking which is not good.

I think we should provide proper incentives for our prosecutors. We clearly can't lean on their moral compass.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#174

Post by tomc1985 »

sgustard wrote: post #153
danso wrote: post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

I don't know why people will happily carry a cell phone (which is a microphone attached to a transmitter, with location tracking to boot) but recoil at an Echo device in their home. Both are equally capable of surveillance, but the phone certainly more so as it's not limited to Wifi (which I could also monitor if I was worried about Echo sending a constant data stream).

Are you kidding? A secured cell phone (like a modern iphone) is a hell of a lot harder to turn into a bug than a quasi-smart device that needs the cloud for all its processing

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#175

Post by neuralRiot »

Kiro wrote: post #72
aleksei wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is it that users don’t realize? You answered yourself in an exemplary fashion, but I'll state it explicitly (and simply). People don't think about it. I'd like to imagine anyone who realises the implications of owning such a device would refuse to own one, although I know I'm mistaken. I don't mean that people should know better (although ofc they should), but new technology is all too easily likened to any ho…

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

Obviously you weighted the risks/ benefits and made your choice, and that's perfect. The problem with these type of devices is people who are totally oblivious to the workings of it and the implication and that will click "i agree" without even read anything. Personally i prefer control over pseudo-convenience on anything.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#176

Post by pasbesoin »

Somebody or other's rule of action/expectation: If they can, they will.

The only brake is significant enough fear of repercussions to themselves.

I guess now I should RTFA. But seriously, put a monitoring device in your home ("Smart TV's, too; whatever), and it will be monitored.

P.S. I hope I don't sound callous about the particular circumstance. Just, from an HN perspective, I think of more and ubiquitous technological oversight. And when I think e.g. of insurance companies measuring every last thing I do...

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#177

Post by jkaplowitz »

rocqua wrote: post #150
jkaplowitz wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Client-side encryption doesn't always solve this. Two main exceptions: First, if the encryption is unlocked by a physical device that doesn't require a memorized code, or by your personal biometrics, they can get that without violating your right against self-incrimination. Second, if they know what information is being hidden by the encryption and just need a copy of it to prove their case, the foregone conclusion d…

> Second, if they know what information is being hidden by the encryption and just need a copy of it to prove their case, the foregone conclusion doctrine lets them demand it anyway. Note that they are then not allowed to use the fact that you could unlock it against you.

True, but they can do that with the actual contents of the information itself, and also with the fact (if true) that you owned or possessed the encrypted device on which it was stored. Just not the fact that you knew how to unlock it.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#178

Post by cgriswald »

danso wrote: post #140
danso wrote: post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

To answer my own question, other outlets have some extra bits of info: http://www.unionleader.com/news/crime/judge-orders-amazon-to... The Union-Leader quotes the district attorney's request, which seems to have cognizance of how Echo works: > On Oct. 30, Senior Assistant Attorney General Geoffrey Ward asked Houran to direct Amazon.com to produce any recordings made between Jan. 27 and Jan. 29, 2017, suggesting evide…

What does it even mean to record? Saving to disk? You can’t start recording after hearing a trigger word and somehow get sound from before the trigger word unless you’ve already got it... I imagine a FIFO stream or buffer that only writes to disk if a trigger word is present.

Also, there may be trigger words that cause recordings even if no actions need to be taken...

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#179

Post by jkaplowitz »

kabdib wrote: post #171
jkaplowitz wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Client-side encryption doesn't always solve this. Two main exceptions: First, if the encryption is unlocked by a physical device that doesn't require a memorized code, or by your personal biometrics, they can get that without violating your right against self-incrimination. Second, if they know what information is being hidden by the encryption and just need a copy of it to prove their case, the foregone conclusion d…

There was a recent successful challenge to the "foregone conclusion" bit (in Florida?) I'd be surprised if that decision survives another level of appeals court.

Do you mean G.A.Q.L. v State of Florida, decided last month by their state court system's Fourth District Court of Appeal? Here's a link to that opinion:

https://www.4dca.org/content/download/404430/3468412/file/18...

It doesn't actually challenge the foregone conclusion doctrine as applied to the data behind the passcode!

It simply concludes that the order to produce the passcodes itself would be forbidden testimonial self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment, and that the state didn't show that they knew "with particularity" what the passcode was protecting, so they couldn't order production of that under the foregone conclusion doctrine.

It appears that does it reject the foregone conclusion as a means to get the passcode itself, because that's not what the state is really trying to do. Matthew Heiman agrees with you here that this may not be a correct decision: http://reason.com/volokh/2018/11/05/foreign-governments-will...

My understanding is that, while the question of compelling passcode disclosure is not fully settled law at the SCOTUS level or in most US circuit courts of appeals, the trend of rulings mostly grants first amendment rights to them. Do you know otherwise?

(Note I'm not a lawyer, just a former law student who continues to geek out about this stuff.)

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#180

Post by cgriswald »

udkyo wrote: post #111
nolok wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sincerely doubt people don't realise that anything after the trigger is sent home, since a "feature" of alexa is that the app let you see each request you made, how alexa answered, and let them know if she got it wrong. I think it's more a case of "don't care" / "don't realize the risks"

On going into the app to let it know when it gets things wrong: I’d love to have it just listen for a “thank you” for a few seconds after it does whatever it thinks we’ve asked it to do.

I’m too sarcastic and deadpan for that to be an accurate metric for me.
Post reply on HN