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

FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#601

Post by thegreatpeter »

glaugh wrote: post #596
mw888 wrote: post #523

There seems to be wild speculation about freedom of speech rights or hacking Signal. The FBI simply joined groupchats and read them. This is trivial stuff.

Do you mean just technically trivial? I agree with that. If you mean more broadly trivial, I see that quite differently. An administration that has repeatedly abused its power in order to intimidate and punish political opponents is opening an investigation into grassroots political opponents. That feels worth being concerned about.

[flagged]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#602

Post by mmooss »

bsimpson wrote: post #361
bs7280 wrote: post #19

A wise man told me, you know signal works because its banned in Russia. I also find it incredibly ironic that they have a problem with this, when the DoD is flagrantly using signal for classified communications.

My personal connections who are in the military use it for texting from undisclosed locations. I've heard from people who have worked with the Signal foundation that it was close to being endorsed for private communication by one branch of government, but that endorsement was rescinded because another branch didn't want people knowing how to stay private.

> I've heard from people who have worked with the Signal foundation that it was close to being endorsed for private communication by one branch of government, but that endorsement was rescinded because another branch didn't want people knowing how to stay private.

The US government recommended Signal to for personal communication. See this article, in the section "Signal in the Biden administration and beyond":

https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/03/27/biden-authorized-sign...

And here is the government publication:

https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/guidance-mo...

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#603

Post by heavyset_go »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #579
heavyset_go wrote: post #521

This is one of the reasons it's crucial that the next set of secure messaging systems does away with tying real phone numbers to accounts. One phone gets compromised and the whole network is identified with their phone numbers.

If the Signal Messaging LLC is compromised, then "updates", e.g., spyware, can be remotely installed on every Signal user's computer, assuming every Signal user allows "automatic updates". I don't think Signal has a setting to turn off updates Not only does one have to worry about other Signal users being compromised, one also has to worry about a third party being compromised: the Signal Messaaging LLC

Signal Messaging LLC is US-based and needs to follow CALEA[1] by law.

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

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#604

Post by CMay »

spacechild1 wrote: post #575
CMay wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I understand it, he laid hands on the officer, then struggled against arrest. He had a gun on him, which is not in itself a problem, but he had already broken the law 3 times by this point and the fact he had a gun on him instantly escalates the potential threat. They don't know if he has multiple guns on him or just the one. Supposedly one of the videos shows him reaching for some black object. I don't kno…

I have seen the videos. He was already on the ground, fixated by several ICE agents, when he was shot 10(!) times. That was after he had been peppersprayed and beaten to the head. At no point did he actually draw or reach for his gun. There was absolutely no reason to shoot him. > With any luck investigation will reveal more details. Kristi Noem said: "This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the sc…

Being on the ground doesn't remove any potential that he could be dangerous.

I don't know why he was being beaten on the ground, that seemed a little excessive. Not sure how many times he was shot, but generally if law enforcement ever makes the determination to shoot they do it to shoot to kill.

They knew he had 1 gun, so he could have 2 guns. The officers don't see the angle most of the camera angles see. They see the perspective they see, from themselves. That is the perspective that will matter by law. What situation were they in and what did they see when they made their decision?

You have the luxury of seeing a perspective the officer did not see, and the officer has the luxury of seeing a perspective you did not see.

People who are in favor of throwing the officer's life away without knowing all of the details are doing basically doing exactly what they're accusing the officer of in suggesting that he threw away this person's life without knowing all the information.

I don't know what Kristi Noem is on about, but she's a political appointee and not an investigator.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#605

Post by RobRivera »

mw888 wrote: post #523

There seems to be wild speculation about freedom of speech rights or hacking Signal. The FBI simply joined groupchats and read them. This is trivial stuff.

Yea, I just assume any easily joinable movement like this is a honeypot of sorts.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#606

Post by mmooss »

Scrounger wrote: post #551
kodyo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CISA recommended Signal for encrypted end-to-end communications for "highly targeted individuals." https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/guidance-mo...

I don't think I agree with the following from this guide: > Do not use a personal virtual private network (VPN). Personal VPNs simply shift residual risks from your internet service provider (ISP) to the VPN provider, often increasing the attack surface. Many free and commercial VPN providers have questionable security and privacy policies. However, if your organization requires a VPN client to access its data, that…

What do you disagree with?

> Personal VPNs simply shift residual risks from your internet service provider (ISP) to the VPN provider, often increasing the attack surface.

That's true. A VPN service replaces the ISP as the Internet gateway with the VPN's systems. By adding a component, you increase the attack surface.

> Many free and commercial VPN providers have questionable security and privacy policies.

Certainly true.

> if your organization requires a VPN client to access its data, that is a different use case.

Also true: That's not a VPN service; you are (probably) connecting to your organization's systems.

There may be better VPN services - Mullvad has a good reputation around here - but we really don't know. Successful VPN services would be a magnet for state-level and other attackers, which is what the document may be concerned with.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#607

Post by tombert »

hedayet wrote: post #111

With all the predatory tech Palantir has produced, it won't take more than a few minutes for FBI to start taking actions, IF they had anything tangible. This is just an intimidation tactic to stop people talking (chatting)

I'm far too lazy to go to a big protest or do anything terribly interesting, but at this point I'd be lying if I said I wasn't afraid publicly criticizing this administration. Palantir is weird and creepy and has infinite resources to aggregate anything that the government wants, and they could be building a registry of people who they're going to deem as "terrorist-leaning" or some such nonsense.

It's not hard to find long posts of me calling the people in the Trump administration "profoundly stupid", with both my "tombert" alias and my real name [1]. I'm not that worried because if Palantir has any value they would also be able to tell that I'm deeply unambitious with these things, but it's still something that concerns me a bit.

[1] Not that hard to find but I do ask you do not post it here publicly.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#608

Post by CMay »

avcloudy wrote: post #573
CMay wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I understand it, he laid hands on the officer, then struggled against arrest. He had a gun on him, which is not in itself a problem, but he had already broken the law 3 times by this point and the fact he had a gun on him instantly escalates the potential threat. They don't know if he has multiple guns on him or just the one. Supposedly one of the videos shows him reaching for some black object. I don't kno…

This is just lunatic speech. The one place he didn't have a gun was in his hands. You're out here acting like if he'd had a gun strapped to his ankle it would have been proof beyond any doubt he was intending to shoot and kill ICE officers. He was pepper sprayed and on the ground surrounded by 6 agents when he was killed . At the time when an agent said that he had a gun (this was after his gun was removed), he was p…

They don't necessarily know that's the only gun he had and the officers aren't Neo, seeing every camera angle at once. What you see from your outside perspective is not what they see. They have to act based on the information they have, which is why it's important you listen to law enforcement for your own safety. All the whistles make that harder, which might be part of the point.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#609

Post by arrozconcosas »

glaugh wrote: post #596
mw888 wrote: post #523

There seems to be wild speculation about freedom of speech rights or hacking Signal. The FBI simply joined groupchats and read them. This is trivial stuff.

Do you mean just technically trivial? I agree with that. If you mean more broadly trivial, I see that quite differently. An administration that has repeatedly abused its power in order to intimidate and punish political opponents is opening an investigation into grassroots political opponents. That feels worth being concerned about.

[flagged]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#610

Post by germinalphrase »

mycodendral wrote: post #141
neogodless wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/ Are you pro or against this?

18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer Freedom of expression does not include freedom from prosecution for real crimes.

“ If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six years, or both”
Post reply on HN