Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#2[deleted]
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#3>agents were not allowed to download or read any messages sent from AN0M accounts in the United States because of privacy laws.
"Privacy laws" being the Fourth Amendment, which the article still makes it sound like they violated by downloading all the messages three times a week.
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#4Now if only those super-strict privacy laws applied to the data orgy that is American private industry...
At least California gets it...
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#5So how many people did they spy on to get those 251 prosecutions?
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#6>agents were not allowed to download or read any messages sent from AN0M accounts in the United States because of privacy laws. "Privacy laws" being the Fourth Amendment, which the article still makes it sound like they violated by downloading all the messages three times a week.
> By the end of 2019, this third country was sending data to the FBI every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, according to the court document.
> "This data comprises the encrypted messages of all the users of AN0MS with a few exceptions," the document reads.
> Those exceptions included approximately 15 AN0M users in the United States.
Sounds like the FBI got the data of everyone except the US users.
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#7So how many people did they spy on to get those 251 prosecutions?
The app was a plant, preloaded on mobile phones you'd only buy for criminal acts, so probably not much more than 251.
For the record, they almost certainly overreached elsewhere but imo, what was done with this app is pretty fair and balanced.
It's much better than requiring backdoors in apps or services. It's almost like real police work.
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#8>agents were not allowed to download or read any messages sent from AN0M accounts in the United States because of privacy laws. "Privacy laws" being the Fourth Amendment, which the article still makes it sound like they violated by downloading all the messages three times a week.
> By the end of 2019, this third country was sending data to the FBI every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, according to the court document. > "This data comprises the encrypted messages of all the users of AN0MS with a few exceptions," the document reads. > Those exceptions included approximately 15 AN0M users in the United States. Sounds like the FBI got the data of everyone except the US users.
Isn't this the classic Five Eyes loophole? I'll spy on you, you'll spy on me, and we'll exchange notes.
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#9So how many people did they spy on to get those 251 prosecutions?
The app was a plant, preloaded on mobile phones you'd only buy for criminal acts, so probably not much more than 251. For the record, they almost certainly overreached elsewhere but imo, what was done with this app is pretty fair and balanced. It's much better than requiring backdoors in apps or services. It's almost like real police work.
they also paid a subscription fee :-P
and it was invite only...
Re: Why no-one in America was arrested as part of Operation Ironside
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> By the end of 2019, this third country was sending data to the FBI every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, according to the court document. > "This data comprises the encrypted messages of all the users of AN0MS with a few exceptions," the document reads. > Those exceptions included approximately 15 AN0M users in the United States. Sounds like the FBI got the data of everyone except the US users.
Isn't this the classic Five Eyes loophole? I'll spy on you, you'll spy on me, and we'll exchange notes.
The US is explicitly not getting data on US citizens from foreign spying according to this article? And the article implies that no loophole was needed for Australia to get data on Australians, there was a legal warrant for that in Australia.
So how is this the "classic Five Eyes loophole"?