Live data from Hacker News

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

propertyofthepeople.org

291–300 of 474 posts

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

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's (scarily) interesting that they react with actual personal attendance based purely on a very limited set of electronic information. From your further description: > We are not religious (at all). We do not attend church, synagogue or mosque. We are lower middle class white Americans born and raised in the USA and have never traveled outside the country. Would not the FBI have been able to any amount of backgroun…

I think what he experienced is another manifestation of the same phenomena as zero-tolerance policies in schools; institutions ask their enforcers to suspend common sense and strictly enforce the letter of the law/guideline/etc, even in situations where any reasonable person would decide it made no sense. They do this because such common sense and gut feelings is how bias and prejudice might creep into their oh-so-pe…

> the teacher's perception of the incident might have bias and prejudice.

I mean that's not entirely wrong either. Bullying was still a thing before zero tolerance policies.

Not to say zero tolerance policies are the right solution, but personal bias _is_ a big problem when it comes to enforcement.

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

#292

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…

> Surely the FBI is not allowed to publicise random dirt they find on innocent people?

If they're doing an investigation, they very likely got the employer involved in order to get more information on the person they're investigating, and companies have liaisons for law enforcement, as well. If the FBI comes knocking and says, "we think you've hired a terrorist," it's going to ruffle some feathers at the company no matter how unfounded or untruthful the claim is.

It isn't just the suspicion of terrorism that might have law enforcement or the FBI knocking at an employer's door. If someone is suspected of any type of cyber crime, the FBI will be coming for all of their computers and electronic devices, including the ones they use at work.

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

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ulbricht was caught because an FBI agent, who would read things slowly and twice, recognized these 4 letters : heyy . That's how Ulbricht sometimes spelled hey , and the agent had seen that particular spelling before in his investigation, in an email from Ulbrict’s student email address. Nick Bilton's book “American Kingpin: The Epic Hunt for the Criminal Mastermind Behind the Silk Road” is a great read, highly recom…

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

Have to admit. I was impressed with the USGOVs ability to recover bitcoin ransoms paid for cyberattacks. I'm not sure if impressed is the right word.

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

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what he experienced is another manifestation of the same phenomena as zero-tolerance policies in schools; institutions ask their enforcers to suspend common sense and strictly enforce the letter of the law/guideline/etc, even in situations where any reasonable person would decide it made no sense. They do this because such common sense and gut feelings is how bias and prejudice might creep into their oh-so-pe…

> the teacher's perception of the incident might have bias and prejudice. I mean that's not entirely wrong either. Bullying was still a thing before zero tolerance policies. Not to say zero tolerance policies are the right solution, but personal bias _is_ a big problem when it comes to enforcement.

Of course. Bias and prejudice is always a real concern. In situations where the teacher gets it wrong and punishes the bullied kid, the kid learns an unfortunate but useful lesson; that some agents of the system cannot be relied on.

But the zero tolerance response to this circumstance ensures the bullied student is prejudiced against, judging him guilty before considering the facts of the individual circumstance. What does that teach the kid? That the system itself cannot be relied on.

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

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Larger point would be if it's obtained unlawfully it can't be used in a court of law against you.

Recent cases:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkppqk/court-throws-out-mess...

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252503524/Berlin-court-f...

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

#296
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Larger point would be if it's obtained unlawfully it can't be used in a court of law against you. Recent cases: https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkppqk/court-throws-out-mess... https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252503524/Berlin-court-f...

That is little consolation in the court of public opinion, where FBI management and the Justice Department have demonstrated willingness and capability to hold mob court and manipulate public opinion outside the formal legal system. They will SWAT you themselves if they like, on live TV.

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

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is an incredibly naive attempt at a smear. > Without them, we’d basically be left with Wikipedia as the only popular entity on the internet outside of corporate control. Wikipedia is absolutely not "outside of corporate control". It is trivially astroturfed to advance special interests. > All of these projects are more properly grouped with government funding in other spheres, such as the BBC or PBS in m…

Um, ok. All of the above projects use not only reproducible builds for many platforms, but they’re all open source, and they all have public security audits. Those three pillars are about as good as it gets. Is there something you would add? I’m not claiming PBS and the BBC are perfect entities, but they do offer an alternative source of information that runs against the grain of corporate media. You would prefer…wha…

> Is there something you would add?

Let's start with "not being created/funded by the State Department or Pentagon".

> You would prefer…what exactly?

Again, let's start with "not being blatant propaganda produced by warmongers".

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

#299

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

this guy, lmfao, completely fucking clueless to what policing is

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

#300

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…

You deserve to be always assumed innocent until proven guilty, and you will have to be proven guilty to be found guilty, and realistically speaking, those premises are extremely technical.
Post reply on HN