Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

bloomberg.com

161–170 of 350 posts

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#161

They are going straight into "think of the children mode" " Smartphone communication is “going to be the preferred method of the pedophile and the criminal. We are going to lose a lot of investigative opportunities." Apparently "what about the terrorists?" isn't as effective anymore. Let's hope the public will see through their manipulative talking points.

They are going straight into "think of the children mode" ... apparently "what about the terrorists?" isn't as effective anymore.

"They" in this case is the chief of a metro police department, whose forensic and surveillance resources are more often spent on pedophiles and drug dealers than terrorism. What else would they say?

If the article's authors wanted a "what about the terrorists?" quote they would have gone to a counter-terrorism official, just like they rang someone at the DEA for a "but drug organizations!" quote.

You're reading a paint-by-numbers article about government impotence and corporate supremacy like it's finely crafted pro-government propaganda.

Let's hope the public will see through their manipulative talking points.

You (and most HN commenters) didn't. Why should they? e.g.:

a) "Beyond lobbying the companies, there is little law enforcement can do without congressional action."

b) "A half-dozen police and federal officials interviewed said that Apple, in particular, was taking an aggressive posture on the issue."

When you take away the outrage-kindling, the gist of the article is that the stodgy old Washington government is incompetent and hip California tech companies are glorious. Not exactly a controversial opinion among the commentariat.

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#162
post #152

I was living in DC during the first Crypto Wars of the late 1990s and covering them as a reporter (I've since shifted to working on recent.io, of course). It sure looks like this will be Crypto Wars II: the Feds Strike Back. From my experience a key question to ask is: What would the eventual law say? Will it make it a federal felony to possess an encrypted phone? Or a federal felony to sell one? The FBI endorsed H.R…

I may be as naive as hell here, but when you go from, "we don't want US citizens selling crypto devices to terrorists" to "Timmy's going to see the inside of a jail cell for 20 years for giving Mark a copy of TailsOS" I just can't see how a judge or jury would let it go that far, and I don't think unintended consequences have ever gotten that bad. It just smacks of fear-mongering. "They'll literally lock up your chil…

Yep, sorry, you're naive. :) The law != common sense. If a law is on the books, it may be applied broadly, even to Timmy and Mark. That's why it's important to ensure the laws are sensible before they're enacted.

Here's one example. Let's say there's a 16-year old girl and a 17-year old boy who are in a consensual dating relationship and, you know, take some racy photos of one other. The photos were taken consensually, not shared with anyone else, and stored only on their own computers/accounts. And let's say they're living in Florida and under state law, they're legally old enough to have sex with each other.

It would be fear-mongering to expect that these two happy teenagers would ever be prosecuted and convicted on "child pornography" charges, right? Except they were. And, as I wrote in 2007, a Florida appeals court upheld their criminal conviction: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1030_3-6157857.html

Yes, sorry, Timmy and Mark, sometimes a judge and jury will let it go that far. Sometimes they will "literally lock up your children..."

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#163
post #66

My reply is... "What about the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution?" Would we really be having these discussions if Americans (speaking as an American here) were better-educated on our own rights, our own foundation, the very fibers of our own history? I mean, this is such a simple amendment, so crystal-clear and eloquent. After reading it (see below), how can there possibly be any doubt as to how the…

I don't think anyone's unclear about the violations, but when our system of government is limited to 2 parties, and BOTH of them are bought and sold to various companies and departments with interest in violating that premise, the ideal is doomed.

Is it really two parties? Are they really that different?

What's the difference between ISIS and WMDs? Barack Obama and George W. Bush?

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#164
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they better have perfect security so there are no leaks proving that, or they're gonna lose their business anyway. I don't buy it, they'd fight that and they'd leak that they're fighting it.

They have leaked it with Apple's warranty canary which was removed.

That definitely could imply they have received an NSL. But as a user, when I say "they would leak that they're fighting it", I would consider that completely insufficient. If they are pulling the kind of crap you say they are, then it will come out. Guaranteed. And then nobody, including me, will ever trust them again.

editing my comment since I can't reply to hellbanner: Percentage doesn't matter, it only takes one. One person to destroy a hundred billion dollar company overnight. I am not saying "Tim Cook can not possibly be lying." I am saying "If Tim Cook lied, he just made a hundred billion dollar bet that he can keep a secret." Personally, I doubt he's that dumb.

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#165
post #87
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if I was trying to break the law then, yeah, I would absolutely go an get an Apple phone if I didn't already have one.

I'd also buy a Toyota or a Honda car, since it's less likely to break down while fleeing the police. Clearly, reliable automobiles are part of a pro-crime agenda.

So is that why the federal government poured our money into GM and Chrysler?

Oftentimes those with an anti-firearms agenda point out that Glocks are preferred among mass murderers. Glock is to guns as Toyota is to cars; reasonably priced and notoriously reliable.

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#166
post #132
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth -- and here I have to wonder how much it's worth to criticize someone's point of view based on a photograph of them -- that's a dress uniform . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dress_uniform

Dress uniform for police? That's not quite as bad as the paramilitary BDUs, but, really?

Police do have official events to attend. In my state capital there is a yearly event to honor fallen officers where representatives from every police force in the state show up in their dress uniforms for a mass memorial service.

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#167
post #152

I was living in DC during the first Crypto Wars of the late 1990s and covering them as a reporter (I've since shifted to working on recent.io, of course). It sure looks like this will be Crypto Wars II: the Feds Strike Back. From my experience a key question to ask is: What would the eventual law say? Will it make it a federal felony to possess an encrypted phone? Or a federal felony to sell one? The FBI endorsed H.R…

I may be as naive as hell here, but when you go from, "we don't want US citizens selling crypto devices to terrorists" to "Timmy's going to see the inside of a jail cell for 20 years for giving Mark a copy of TailsOS" I just can't see how a judge or jury would let it go that far, and I don't think unintended consequences have ever gotten that bad. It just smacks of fear-mongering. "They'll literally lock up your chil…

Yes, but the problem is, the current mindset is to write laws that give them the right to do that.

The question isn't whether sanity would prevail in court. (I'm somewhat optimistic that it would, eventually.) The question is, given the current fear-driven mindset, isn't it probable that something like that will be written? And how do we stop it from being written (or at least enacted)?

Sanity in the court room is the last line of defense, not the first...

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#168
post #152

I was living in DC during the first Crypto Wars of the late 1990s and covering them as a reporter (I've since shifted to working on recent.io, of course). It sure looks like this will be Crypto Wars II: the Feds Strike Back. From my experience a key question to ask is: What would the eventual law say? Will it make it a federal felony to possess an encrypted phone? Or a federal felony to sell one? The FBI endorsed H.R…

I find it interesting that on one hand the government is telling a technology company they can't create technology which makes communication private and on the other hand the government is charging the CEO of a tech company[0] for creating technology which removes the privacy from communication.[0]

"In the first prosecution of its kind, federal officials said that StealthGenie violated the law by offering the ability to secretly monitor phone calls and other communications in almost real time, something typically legal only for law enforcement."

[0] http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/make-of-ap...

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#169
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be as naive as hell here, but when you go from, "we don't want US citizens selling crypto devices to terrorists" to "Timmy's going to see the inside of a jail cell for 20 years for giving Mark a copy of TailsOS" I just can't see how a judge or jury would let it go that far, and I don't think unintended consequences have ever gotten that bad. It just smacks of fear-mongering. "They'll literally lock up your chil…

Yep, sorry, you're naive. :) The law != common sense. If a law is on the books, it may be applied broadly, even to Timmy and Mark. That's why it's important to ensure the laws are sensible before they're enacted. Here's one example. Let's say there's a 16-year old girl and a 17-year old boy who are in a consensual dating relationship and, you know, take some racy photos of one other. The photos were taken consensuall…

Ah, but that plays into the US's very strange views on sex. It feels like an exception, rather than the general rule.

Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data

#170
post #46

If you support this sort of system, you are saying that individuals should be able to place themselves above democracy. Like it or not, we have a legal system that entitles the government to execute lawfully obtained warrants. Tech companies seeking to make this harder are acting against democracy. It's time for Silicon Valley to decide what side it's on: Democracy, or the alternative.

You might as well have thrown in the term "patriotism" while you on that buzzword kick.

There is nothing in the actions of Apple or Google that will prevent search warrants from being issued. Now you'll need to go directly to the person who owns the device in question. As for what happens then is likely to depend on the country and how the courts view this, from a self-incrimination perspective.

Post reply on HN