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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 350 posts

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

#291

Post by Roboprog »

gear54rus wrote: post #278
sitkack wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but... the law is not rational. It will execute the code you give it.

Exactly. This is precisely the point. It will interpret and execute whatever code is thrown at it. The problem is that the code is NOT DETERMINISTIC (or non-deterministic, whatever). It can be interpreted in a variety of different ways. This and the fact that 'compiled' code is sometimes altered by applying some money-based side effects gives us some pretty ridiculous results. Correct me if I'm wrong but there's no e…

Don't think of it as corruption, think of it as aspect oriented programming!

BEFORE: go to jail

APPLY: expensive lawyer, public pressure

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

#292

Post by Roboprog »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #194
rsync wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"With end-to-end encryption where the messages are encrypted and decrypted on the client it would not be possible for anyone with access to phone records or central servers to read what was said. They would need to obtain the private keys that are generated on the client devices themselves." Would that it were. You are using the application processor (the "computer") to do that work, but there are two other computers…

It seems like what we need to do is separate the damn things. Build the phone as two independent machines that only communicate with each other over ethernet. Then the user controls the one that runs Android and the other one never sees plaintext.

Don't expect to see that architecture on the floor of a retailer near you anytime soon. Maybe in the EU??? NOT in the US.

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

#293

Post by Roboprog »

higherpurpose wrote: post #45
gnarbarian wrote: post #8

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.

I'm surprised they even admit it's mostly used in the war on drugs. As if we want the US government to help [1] the Sinaloa cartel dominate even more - sorry, I meant to "win the war on drugs" (ha ha!). [1] - http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-us-government-and-the-...

Hmm. Kind of like the reverse of the bit in Charles Stross' "Merchant Princes" novel series where the trans-dimensional smugglers donate to the Partnership for a Drug-Free America to help keep drugs illegal and the price up.

Except your example is real, just like back in the 80s when the govt (CIA?) helped smuggle in cocaine.

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

#294

Post by sitkack »

wl wrote: post #224
sitkack wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only is his finger on the trigger but the weapon is cocked.

That's an M1911. They're designed to be carried in condition one, which means that the hammer is cocked and the manual safety is engaged, otherwise known as "cocked and locked." His trigger discipline is still inexcusable.

And a law enforcement "professional" shouldn't be carrying a gun that is "cocked and locked" SA firearms are not safe for everyone involved.

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

#295

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Zigurd wrote: post #273
freehunter wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They could wear suits. That might remind them they are of the people, and their first priority is to serve the people. They might also consider attending the memorial service for Mike Brown. In suits.

They'd have to only attend if off-duty then wouldn't they? One point of police uniform is to identify a person as being a warranted police officer on duty (then there's the appearance of officialdom and the sense of inferiority it breeds in others, the camaraderie, ...). You'd probably need to change the law if you want to allow regular warranted officers to be on duty in civilian clothing, jurisdiction dependent of course.

I don't really understand why you don't want to be able to identify your police officers though - even the UPS drivers wear uniform.

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

#296

Post by probably_wrong »

conformal wrote: post #140
xnull wrote: post #103

I hypothesize that this is a coordinated yet simple ruse to rebuild trust in these brands post-Snowden [1][2]. There was similar press coverage regarding the DEA and iCloud encryption that was misreported in a similar way [3]. The Intercept (where Glenn Greenwald is now reporting from) has a story on what data Apple can still easily give away if you do believe they can't decrypt individual machines [4]. But maybe you…

i think it's great to see ppl being skeptical of security claims from phone manufacturers. trying to secure a normal cellphone is pretty much impossible and if you're storing sensitive information on one, you are just waiting to get fucked. i think all this "sound and fury" is likely a ruse to entice ios and android users into a false sense of safety post snowden disclosure. being able to encrypt your drive doesn't m…

It's already there, in the third paragraph of the article:

“This is a very bad idea,” said Cathy Lanier, chief of the Washington Metropolitan Police Department, in an interview. 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.”

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

#297

Post by gambiting »

diminoten wrote: post #157
declan wrote: 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…

17 year olds were put on sex offender lists for having sex together, despite every call that "anti-pedophilia laws will never be used against teenagers having sex!". If a law can be used for a malicious purpose, it will be.

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

#298

Post by deathanatos »

Arjuna wrote: 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…

> [the fourth amendment]

If a warrant is issued, the government has the right to search and seize under the forth.

My argument is that they may search for and/or seize the physical medium containing the data. If I encrypted that data — on a disk, a piece of paper, a network connection —, the question, I think, is why should I, a citizen, tell you, the government, the key with which I encrypted that data?

As a citizen, I am not required to speak just because it might (or even will) help a government investigation. Likewise, I don't see why I should be required to divulge a key. Especially if there isn't yet a crime that people know to have been committed.

In other words: [No person] shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself

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

#299

Post by bad_user »

mentat wrote: post #287
bad_user wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> being able to encrypt your drive doesn't matter if your OS and its applications are exploitable Because, you know, security measures that aren't 100% perfect are on equal footing as no security at all. Seriously? That's a huge fallacy. In the end, it's all about the cost. When speaking of the NSA, we are primarily concerned with mass surveillance, because lets be honest, if you're targeted directly then you don't s…

GP is actually making a factual statement not just waving his hands around. Data at rest encryption doesn't matter if one can gain execution control with supervisor level privileges (or control another processor or part of the process which does.) This is why security is hard. These aren't NSA level attacks, they're what are used for the jailbreaks that come out for every version. It's a good idea to ask questions be…

Well, I disagree with his factual statement and I tried stating the reasons why.

I have my Android encrypted and I do feel safer, because I've got my 2-factor auth generator on it and now at the very least I feel safe about losing it. So why are we talking about a false sense of security, when an encrypted phone is factually more secure than one that isn't?

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

#300

Post by tn13 »

Am I the only one who thinks this is just a farce ? Apple and Google probably simply claimed this to save their reputation and "Law Enforcement" is putting up a fight which it has already planned to lose publicly but Google and Apple will co-operate through the backdoor while giving a false sense of security to its user base ?
Post reply on HN