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

The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

fee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 155 posts

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#121

Post by mhb »

spyder wrote: post #119
mhb wrote: post #118

Probably this isn't technically possible but here is a possible way to collectively authenticate cell towers: A service which receives information from an app reporting which cell towers are in range of the phone. The server triangulates the positions of cell towers and updates users about their authenticity.

There are several several IMSI catcher detector apps, but they aren't perfect: https://www.wired.com/story/stingray-detector-apps/

I don't understand how those work but they seem different from what I am suggesting. I am saying to use the strength of the cell tower signal received by many phones in order to detect where authentic cell towers are.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#122

Post by captainredbeard »

iso947 wrote: post #96
nothingtos33 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. Last I checked the 2nd amendment was still a right.

Which militia are you in?

The 2nd amendment is better interpreted using this modern translation:

Regulated armies aside, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#123

Post by mirimir »

seandougall wrote: post #52
mirimir wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that a key question is whether one can trust iOS airplane mode to fully take the phone offline. And under what circumstances does the phone leave airplane mode, and go back online. But even if that were solid, you'd still be ~unable to install apps that Apple doesn't provide. Unless you play the developer game, and I gather that's limited in app number, and how long they'll stay functional.

> whether one can trust iOS airplane mode to fully take the phone offline. I mean, if Apple says airplane mode turns off the cell radio, that’s a falsifiable claim, so you don’t have to take it entirely on faith. It might be possible to hide it in the UI, but you can’t hide a radio signal.

Right, but I was most curious about the persistence of the setting.

Say you set airplane mode. And then the phone sleeps. Will it still be in airplane mode after you wake it?

Or say you shut the phone off, and restart it. Is it still in airplane mode?

That's an issue because, as soon as it's not in airplane mode, it knows where it is.

And that reminds me, does airplane mode disable GPS? Because if it doesn't, it's more or less pointless, from a geolocation perspective.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#124

Post by meowface »

celticmusic wrote: post #99
meowface wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that lethal force is the only reasonable option in that situation, but a human doesn't become "garbage" simply because they fall victim to addiction to a substance which causes them such suffering during withdrawal that they feel like they have no other choice but to try to steal to end the withdrawal. If you were in that same situation after some friends got you hooked, you might steal something to…

Sorry, but I'm going to fall on the side of the law abiding citizen here. If you can't know the intent (and you can't), then you must assume the worst intent and act accordingly. Anything else is naive. Because I promise you one thing, I look up and see a stranger in my house, I'm attacking them immediately with no thought towards anything except protecting myself and everyone in the house. There will be no questions…

As stated in my first sentence, I agree with you. I think lethal force is the only reasonable option here.

I was just saying drug addicts aren't necessarily garbage. They face lethal force because they've broken into one's home; not because "they're garbage".

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#125

Post by remote_phone »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #78
BurningFrog wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to donate to ACLU when they were a pure civil liberties organization. Now that they're a leftist/social justice group I have nowhere to donate.

Gay Marriage, Citizens United, Whistleblower protections, Encryption, Net Neutrality, warrantless surveillance... It's actually hard to think of an issue where Republicans have been on the right side of protecting Civil liberties in recent history other than gun control. Are the ACLU leftists or are leftists the ones protecting civil liberties? Sort of a chicken and the egg situation.

Obama was absolutely against gay marriage for both elections, and extended Bush’s policies, he didn’t retract them when he had the opportunity.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#126

Post by meowface »

acollins1331 wrote: post #86
meowface wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that lethal force is the only reasonable option in that situation, but a human doesn't become "garbage" simply because they fall victim to addiction to a substance which causes them such suffering during withdrawal that they feel like they have no other choice but to try to steal to end the withdrawal. If you were in that same situation after some friends got you hooked, you might steal something to…

Sorry buddy, but there around millions of people around the world that go through very painful withdraws and don't break into people houses. The withdraws don't make them bad people, the criminal neglect for others does.

Sure, but many of them feel they have to resort to stealing something, whether or not it's from a break-in. Of course break-ins and theft are extremely unethical; I'm just saying that the full circumstances should be considered, and they're not necessarily irredeemable human beings just because they're committing this crime.

A spree shooter killing innocent people in cold blood is garbage, and a terrorist blowing up a building is garbage, but a drug addict in awful pain due to terrible decisions acting purely on impulse to stymie the pain isn't garbage. They take their life in their hands if they break into someone's home, because that's how any break-in has to be treated, but that doesn't make them subhuman.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#127

Post by meowface »

oblio wrote: post #80
meowface wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about a death sentence, but about staying alive yourself. If a stranger's inside of your home, there is a significant chance they're going to murder or grievously harm you or others in your house. I think this is true whether or not you're in a country where guns are commonplace. Even if their goal was purely to steal something, things progress very quickly in chaotic situations like those; especially when t…

> If a stranger's inside of your home, there is a significant chance they're going to murder or grievously harm you or others in your house. Why would you assume this? Do you have any studies that back this up? My default assumption, way more logical I'd say, would be that they want to steal stuff. Stealing is logical and rational, under some circumstances. Attacking someone (so putting yourself at risk as the attack…

There are too many variables and too many possibilities which could end in you and/or your loved ones dying.

Of course it's not in their rational interest to kill anyone, but what if they're suddenly surprised by a homeowner armed with a baseball bat while they have a gun? They're probably going to shoot and kill the homeowner.

And there is a significant chance they're not in any sort of rational state of mind at that time.

So even if they don't want to kill or harm anyone, they easily may end up doing so due to the circumstances. And then there's the added possibility that they want to steal but would also not turn down the opportunity to sexually assault someone while they're there. And then also the additional possibility that they do intend to harm or kill people while there. That's far too great a risk to treat it as anything but a lethal threat.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#128

Post by BoiledCabbage »

CapricornNoble wrote: post #114
oblio wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everything dangerous has to be shot on sight. That's not being naive, it's being reasonable.

Do you lock your doors and windows? In what scenario does someone who has bypassed your domicile's security at night have anything other than malicious intentions?

His point that you keep missing is that malicious intentions doesn't equal death.

Someone wanting to steal from you doesn't mean the death penalty. Stealing is malicious.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#129

Post by gruez »

mirimir wrote: post #123
seandougall wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whether one can trust iOS airplane mode to fully take the phone offline. I mean, if Apple says airplane mode turns off the cell radio, that’s a falsifiable claim, so you don’t have to take it entirely on faith. It might be possible to hide it in the UI, but you can’t hide a radio signal.

Right, but I was most curious about the persistence of the setting. Say you set airplane mode. And then the phone sleeps. Will it still be in airplane mode after you wake it? Or say you shut the phone off, and restart it. Is it still in airplane mode? That's an issue because, as soon as it's not in airplane mode, it knows where it is. And that reminds me, does airplane mode disable GPS? Because if it doesn't, it's mo…

>Say you set airplane mode. And then the phone sleeps. Will it still be in airplane mode after you wake it?

>Or say you shut the phone off, and restart it. Is it still in airplane mode?

Yes.

>And that reminds me, does airplane mode disable GPS? Because if it doesn't, it's more or less pointless, from a geolocation perspective.

Why does that matter? You can turn location services off. Moreover, GPS functions passively. Turning it on doesn't transmit your location to anyone.

Re: The StingRay Is Why the 4th Amendment Was Written (2017)

#130

Post by gruez »

jellicle wrote: post #37
softwaredoug wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually more a case for authentication. Why don’t our phones authenticate cell towers when connecting to them? Why are providers so lax at enforcing that?

Even if your phone insisted that each cell tower authenticate itself as an authentic Verizon Tower(TM), then Verizon would just provide 500 extra authentic tower keys to various police agencies for their use. shrug emoji You can't trust cell companies to help you against the government.

>then Verizon would just provide 500 extra authentic tower keys to various police agencies for their use. shrug emoji

I don't buy this reasoning. It suggests that cell companies will roll over to any law enforcement demands. If that's the case, why don't law enforcement ask cell companies for their cell tower logs directly? Why spend thousands of dollars on equipment when the same information is an email away?

Post reply on HN