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

Post by FearlessNebula » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 11:52 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #212

yabones wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had surprisingly good luck with strong-arming people into switching. The important part is having their trust, if they don't believe you they won't listen. The next part is to make simple, verifiable, and non-technical arguments for switching. Believe it or not, almost everybody is willing to take small steps if they're free. Instead of rambling on and on about "end to end encryption" or "double-ratchet cryptogr…

Also, a big one that works for me (especially iPhone users, which are the hardest to convert): "You can send full quality images and videos to Android users." The fact that Apple shots themselves in the foot is an advantage to Signal.

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 12:19 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #337

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…

Is it prohibited to visit those websites? I once was interested to understand the way radicals think, to read about their arguments, so I spent some time hanging around some radical websites.

Post by coldtea » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 12:24 PM UTC

NmAmDa wrote: post #329

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…

Imagine being a muslim in such case. Trying to convince them that this can be a mix-up ( which is possible easily) won't be successful.

Post by vadfa » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 12:31 PM UTC

Borgz wrote: post #42

vadfa wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is correct. By default all messages sent over Telegram are stored permanently in their servers unencrypted.

Not exactly. Non-secret chats are stored encrypted on Telegram's servers, and separately from keys. The goal seems to be to require multiple jurisdictions to issue a court order before data can be decrypted. https://telegram.org/privacy#3-3-1-cloud-chats https://telegram.org/faq#q-do-you-process-data-requests

Post by Terretta » Wed, Dec 01, 2021, 12:35 PM UTC

jc01480 wrote: post #331

xanaxagoras wrote: post #43

They left off one very popular messenger, SMS: * Message content: All * Subpoena: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years * 18 U.S.C 2703(d): can render all message content for the last 1-7 years * Search warrant: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years * Vague suspicion plus a small fee to the carrier: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years

Major service providers do not maintain SMS history beyond 24 hours, let alone 1-7 years (last time I worked a case that is). They’re transparent about it as well. Look up the LE liaison contacts on their sites and they’ll clearly list what is available or not available. That’s why it’s crucial to get the actual devices themselves. Reason: the infrastructure to manage SMS content for every customer for 7 years with z…