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

‘Every message was copied to the police’

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 193 posts

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#141

Post by jessaustin »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #30
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #26

Interesting thing about intercepting messages which are encrypted using modern encryption protocols like OTR is deniability. If a police installs MitM on a server, it can't cryptographically prove that messages were originating from criminals, not written themselves.

True but it can be shown to be plausibly written by the defendant if there's no reasonable way the police could have known details without the message being intercepted. For example: "Hey Bill, I'm going to steal the car at 123 Anywhere Street on Thursday at 2 am." Police then put a camera at 123 Anywhere St., and a reasonable juror would likely conclude there are two lines of legitimate evidence.

If they have video of a car theft (or any other crime), they don't need to mention the intercepted message. There the defendant is, stealing the car, on video. That's illegal. It is only when they need to prove marginal stuff like conspiracy that intercepts would matter.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#142

Post by dredmorbius »

monocasa wrote: post #130
dredmorbius wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's back up a bit here. What specifically in this comment would you penalise? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28620403 And how would you address the issue of people being good sams --- making calls on behalf of someone else when they ask, in good faith. See for example RMS: When I need to call someone, I ask someone nearby to let me make a call. If I use someone else's cell phone, that doesn't give Big Brother…

> What specifically in this comment would you penalise? One comment up from that I said: > The easier way to attack this is by instituting a know your customer law for phone systems including prepaid SIMs, combined with accomplice charges for anyone who's SIM is used in connection with criminal acts. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > And how would you address the issue of people being good sams --- making calls on behalf of someone…

Penalisation under a "KYC" law would have to be extreme.

And I suspect there'd be all kinds of challenges to such a requirement.

Again, the Good Sam loophole is huge.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#143

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

SolarNet wrote: post #132
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #106

It is a fascinating case, but apart from the technical aspect of it.. how is that not entrapment? FBI effectively created a tool explicitly designed for criminal element and 'marketed' as such. I would ask about legality, but I am worried its in a very, very grey area.

I mean they had 10,000 users and 800 arrests. That's an 8% criminality rate, it seems like they didn't entrap anyone who wasn't committing crimes anyway. Entrapment is about trapping people in a situation where committing crimes is the best option available. Selling people a secure phone does not do that.

That or careful individuals still used coded messages.

That said, I think and other posters have a point about entrapment. Needless to say, I am not a lawyer.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#144

Post by 14 »

jacquesm wrote: post #121
ChuckMcM wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny but that is exactly where my brain went too, it was like "Wow, that is some serious market validation."

Of course, but there would be similar market validation for being able to hold up a bank without ever being recognized or to be able to steal money from bank accounts anonymously. That 'market' is called crime, and obviously criminals will be more than happy to fork over money for tools that help them to commit crimes without being arrested. In reality though, that market doesn't exist because if you or I would addre…

There are more reasons then committing a crime for wanting anonymity. If I was someone with money like a celebrity I would want this phone. If I was a business with sensitive information I would want this phone. And so on.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#145

Post by monocasa »

dredmorbius wrote: post #142
monocasa wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What specifically in this comment would you penalise? One comment up from that I said: > The easier way to attack this is by instituting a know your customer law for phone systems including prepaid SIMs, combined with accomplice charges for anyone who's SIM is used in connection with criminal acts. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > And how would you address the issue of people being good sams --- making calls on behalf of someone…

Penalisation under a "KYC" law would have to be extreme. And I suspect there'd be all kinds of challenges to such a requirement. Again, the Good Sam loophole is huge.

> Penalisation under a "KYC" law would have to be extreme.

Yep. It would have to be enacted in the kind of furvor like existed around 9/11. But, the PATRIOT act had been floating around DC for years before 9/11 too.

> And I suspect there'd be all kinds of challenges to such a requirement.

> Again, the Good Sam loophole is huge.

In the US, it really isn't. It's a patchwork of state and local laws that could absolutely be invalidated by the feds in the case of a global communications medium like the phone network, since that implies interstate commerce.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#146

Post by onemoresoop »

advael wrote: post #125
d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever hung out with a cokehead?

Sure. I've met multiple cocaine users

Don't care for drugs or sex work, for all I care they should be legal. What is horrifying to me is the amount of violence / abuse amounting not only to slavery and trafficking but also the murders of the innocent these people commit. Should they be left unchecked, to flourish? Look at countries where criminal activity has gone up severely, thinking of drug cartels in Mexico for one (or other places) where normal people can no longer feel safe even if they want nothing to do with this underworld.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#147

Post by Aerroon »

14 wrote: post #144
jacquesm wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but there would be similar market validation for being able to hold up a bank without ever being recognized or to be able to steal money from bank accounts anonymously. That 'market' is called crime, and obviously criminals will be more than happy to fork over money for tools that help them to commit crimes without being arrested. In reality though, that market doesn't exist because if you or I would addre…

There are more reasons then committing a crime for wanting anonymity. If I was someone with money like a celebrity I would want this phone. If I was a business with sensitive information I would want this phone. And so on.

>If I was someone with money like a celebrity I would want this phone.

I think this part is underestimated by most people. Celebrities are frequently under a microscope and having to live your life while worrying about somebody overhearing it and taking it to the press must be frustrating. Everyone has bad moments in their lives, but at least for most of us these won't be dragged up and published to the world. A device like this could help alleviate that fear a little bit.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#148

Post by ChuckMcM »

jacquesm wrote: post #121
ChuckMcM wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny but that is exactly where my brain went too, it was like "Wow, that is some serious market validation."

Of course, but there would be similar market validation for being able to hold up a bank without ever being recognized or to be able to steal money from bank accounts anonymously. That 'market' is called crime, and obviously criminals will be more than happy to fork over money for tools that help them to commit crimes without being arrested. In reality though, that market doesn't exist because if you or I would addre…

To be fair, I remember the story of the guy that designed the drug cartel's radio system[1]. And I share your dislike of facilitating bad actors.

That said, having met the "ad tech" industry[2] when doing a search engine I can say there are a large number of people who are perfectly happy to take the money from bad actors with a "perfectly legal" product and reasonable deniability.

But all of these schemes have a certain "addressable market" and an "expected return" which are hard to judge. Putting numbers to the "completely anonymous" phone scam was interesting.

[1] https://www.wired.com/2012/11/zeta-radio/

[2] And to be clear, there are legitimate folks trying to do ad tech in legitimate ways, but there is also a lot of fraud in ad tech which involves setting up networks to take money from advertisers and feed it to bad actors.

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#149

Post by ChuckMcM »

omreaderhn wrote: post #128
jacquesm wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but there would be similar market validation for being able to hold up a bank without ever being recognized or to be able to steal money from bank accounts anonymously. That 'market' is called crime, and obviously criminals will be more than happy to fork over money for tools that help them to commit crimes without being arrested. In reality though, that market doesn't exist because if you or I would addre…

As far as I can tell, An0m has the same marketing pitch as Purism.

... or the "Freedom phone"

Re: ‘Every message was copied to the police’

#150

Post by upofadown »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #26

Interesting thing about intercepting messages which are encrypted using modern encryption protocols like OTR is deniability. If a police installs MitM on a server, it can't cryptographically prove that messages were originating from criminals, not written themselves.

Yeah it is well known that all you have to do is claim that the police forged the evidence and then that evidence is immediately thrown out. If the police don't have hard cryptographic evidence than they are just out of luck.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if anyone ever tried the deniability defence in court:

"Ha Ha. You can't link those messages to my public key. They could of been forged."

"We can't for sure link your identity to your public key in the first place. Why should we care about any of this?"

Post reply on HN