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

FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

propertyofthepeople.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 474 posts

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#271

Post by rubyist5eva »

throw_away_dgs wrote: post #230

Some FBI agents came to my house once and told me that my home Internet had been used to visit Islamic Extremist websites. They brought a local police office with them and a 'threat assessment' coordinator from my workplace. They asked me if my family was Muslim and wanted to know if we had been radicalized. We are not religious (at all). We do not attend church, synagogue or mosque. We are lower middle class white A…

Did they have a warrant? Never talk to the police without counsel, refuse all searches without warrants, "we might think you went on a website" is not probable cause, you have a right to an attorney and silence.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#272

Post by akira2501 »

sjs382 wrote: post #265
throw_away_dgs wrote: post #230

Some FBI agents came to my house once and told me that my home Internet had been used to visit Islamic Extremist websites. They brought a local police office with them and a 'threat assessment' coordinator from my workplace. They asked me if my family was Muslim and wanted to know if we had been radicalized. We are not religious (at all). We do not attend church, synagogue or mosque. We are lower middle class white A…

> and a 'threat assessment' coordinator from my workplace. What was the reason for this? What type of workplace?

I'm assuming any workplace which requires a government security clearance to enter and work in.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#273

Post by IIAOPSW »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #264
throw_away_dgs wrote: post #230

Some FBI agents came to my house once and told me that my home Internet had been used to visit Islamic Extremist websites. They brought a local police office with them and a 'threat assessment' coordinator from my workplace. They asked me if my family was Muslim and wanted to know if we had been radicalized. We are not religious (at all). We do not attend church, synagogue or mosque. We are lower middle class white A…

"threat assessment' coordinator from my workplace" "I feared that I may lose my job." I understand that police/FBI have to conduct investigation. What dont understand is involvement of the employer , it's extremely disturbing - you have not been convincted, you have not been charged, you are not even a suspect or accused of anything at this point - how is your private life the business of your employer? Why is your p…

The FBI still has buildings named after J Edgar Hoover. That should tell you everything you need to know about their institutional respect for justice and due process.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#274

Post by akira2501 »

kingcharles wrote: post #224
minerva23 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you have something to hide Most people don't realize that most people have something to hide. The USA has so many laws on its books. Many of which are outright bizarre[0] and some of which normal people might normally break[1]. And that's only counting current/past laws. It wasn't that long ago a US President was suggesting all Muslims should be forced to carry special IDs[2]. If you have a documented history be…

I always liked this one I found in the Illinois statutes - it basically criminalizes every person online: Barratry. If a person wickedly and willfully excites and stirs up actions or quarrels between the people of this State with a view to promote strife and contention, he or she is guilty of the petty offense of common barratry[.] https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=0720...

Barratry typically implies that this is specifically being done with lawsuits and other legal instruments, not in the general case.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#275

Post by FactCore »

ndesaulniers wrote: post #188
leokennis wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My advice if you’re not on the level where three letter agencies are actively interested in your comings and goings: - Use a strong pass phrase - Enable biometrics so you don’t need to type that pass phrase 100 times per day - Learn the shortcut to have your phone disable biometrics and require the pass phrase so you can use it when police is coming for you, you’re entering the immigration line in the airport etc. -…

> Learn the shortcut to have your phone disable biometrics and require the pass phrase On my Pixel (Android), it's hold the power button for ~2 seconds then select Lockdown.

In case anyone with an Android is confused because they don't see the option: I believe that you have to explicitly enable the Lockdown option in Android's system settings before it shows up.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#276

Post by twobitshifter »

ichydkrsrnae wrote: post #267
unobatbayar wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what they want you to think. He was caught because; Nothing can match against the surveillance arsenal of the NSA.

That's not what I think, that's what Nick Bilton thinks. The quality of his book makes me partial to his thesis, of course, but NSA conspiracy blah adds nothing. Also, lots more went into catching him than just heyy , but that was the lucky break that had him caught. Now he shares a prison with Dr. Unabomber Kazinsky.

That could be the story but since parallel construction is routinely used to hide the existence of surveillance tools and back doors it’s not unreasonable to doubt it.

I thought I had heard it was stackoverflow, is that looped in somehow?

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#278

Post by freeflight »

gnopgnip wrote: post #95
heavyset_go wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also: * Law enforcement simply asks nicely: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years

The Stored Communications Act makes disclosing the contents of messages without a search warrant unlawful

Just like the NSA spying on Americans is unlawful [0] the FBI terrorizing political movements is unlawful [1] or the CIA operating in the US is unlawful [2]

Yet, I'm pretty sure all these are still happening, to a certain degree, to this day.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nsa-spying-idUSKBN25T...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_CHAOS

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#279

Post by selectodude »

quenix wrote: post #202
kingcharles wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you _are_ at the level where TLAs are interested in you they will not give you a chance to mash that button. You will have a loaded gun pointed at your head out of nowhere and you will freeze. From experience.

Is that a story you mind sharing?

He got popped for pedophilia if I remember correctly.

Re: FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]

#280

Post by cunthorpe »

baby wrote: post #46

I'm wondering how this was obtained, and how old this is? For WhatsApp: > if target is using an iPhone and iCloud backups enabled, iCloud returns may contain WhatsApp data, to include message content Probably not true since WhatsApp launched encrypted backups.

WhatsApp has its own backups in addition to regular full-phone iCloud backups.

If WhatsApp does not encrypt its content at rest locally, then “iCloud backups” still contain everything unencrypted too.

Post reply on HN