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

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#131

Post by peyton »

scoofy wrote: post #91
fusslo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never agree with you. protestors behaving legally or practicing civil disobedience can still have their lives ruined by people in power. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-supreme-court-s...

The literal point of civil disobedience is accepting that you may end up in jail: "Any man who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for the law." -- Letter from the Birmingham Jail , MLK Jr: https://people.uncw.edu/schmidt/201Stuff…

Importantly this definition references an individual’s conscience. Seditious conspiracy is another matter. Here is the statute:

> If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

A group chat coordinating use of force may be tough.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#132

Post by Cornbilly »

kodyo wrote: post #60
psunavy03 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOD is not using "flagrantly using Signal." The Secretary of Defense, whatever his preferred pronouns are, is breaking the law.

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

The best part is that, in trying to comply with this guidance, the government chose Telemessage to provide the message archiving required by the Federal Records Act.

The only problem is that Telemessage was wildly insecure and was transmitting/storing message archives without any encryption.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#133

Post by [deleted] »

mycodendral wrote: post #108
quickthrowman wrote: post #76

I’d be curious to know what they plan to charge people with.

18 U.S.C. § 372 — Conspiracy to impede or injure officer 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 du…

[deleted]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#134

Post by causalscience »

rainonmoon wrote: post #99
causalscience wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been hearing for years people say "Signal requires phone number therefore I don't use it", and I've been hearing them mocked for years. Turns out they were right.

Absolutely nothing in this article is related to feds using conversation metadata to map participants, so, no they weren’t.

[flagged]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#135

Post by midasz »

SR2Z wrote: post #100
charliebwrites wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The steps to trouble: - identify who owns the number - compel that person to give unlocked phone - government can read messages of _all_ people in group chat not just that person Corollary: Disappearing messages severely limits what can be read

Unless they compel people at gunpoint (which prevents the government from bringing a case), they will probably not have much luck with this. As soon as a user sets up a passcode or other lock on their phone, it is beyond the ability of even most parts of the US government to look inside. It's much more likely that the government convinces one member of the group chat to turn on the other members and give up their pho…

> which prevents the government from bringing a case

Genuinely, from outside, it seems like your government doesn't give a damn on what they are and aren't allowed to do.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#136

Post by snarky_dog »

scoofy wrote: post #91
fusslo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never agree with you. protestors behaving legally or practicing civil disobedience can still have their lives ruined by people in power. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-supreme-court-s...

The literal point of civil disobedience is accepting that you may end up in jail: "Any man who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for the law." -- Letter from the Birmingham Jail , MLK Jr: https://people.uncw.edu/schmidt/201Stuff…

[dead]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#137

Post by gosub100 »

causalscience wrote: post #84
ddtaylor wrote: post #6

I don't know signal very well but when I have spoken to others about it they mention that the phone number is the only metadata they will have access to. This seems like a good example of that being enough metadata to be a big problem.

I've been hearing for years people say "Signal requires phone number therefore I don't use it", and I've been hearing them mocked for years. Turns out they were right.

Suppose they didn't require that. Wouldn't that open themselves up to DDoS? An angry nation or ransom-seeker could direct bots to create accounts and stuff them with noise.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#138

Post by mothballed »

scoofy wrote: post #91
fusslo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never agree with you. protestors behaving legally or practicing civil disobedience can still have their lives ruined by people in power. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-supreme-court-s...

The literal point of civil disobedience is accepting that you may end up in jail: "Any man who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for the law." -- Letter from the Birmingham Jail , MLK Jr: https://people.uncw.edu/schmidt/201Stuff…

If you let the government stomp on your constitutional rights and willingly go to jail on unconstitutional grounds, then that's not respect for the law. That's respect for injustice.

Accepting jail over 1A protected protests only proves you're weak (not in the morally deficient way, just from a physical possibilities way) enough to be taken. No one thinks more highly of you or your 'respect for the law' for being caught and imprisoned in such case, though we might not think lesser of you, since we all understand it is often a suicide mission to resist it.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#140

Post by derbOac »

mycodendral wrote: post #126
bediger4000 wrote: post #4

Why? That's unequivocally constitutionally protected speech. Why is our tax money being wasted on this?

Federal felony, not free speech. 18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer

There's been lots of legal writing pointing out these statutes basically refer to impeding an officer by threat or physical force, which that statute you cite states. It doesn't refer to anything about providing food to someone who is fearing for their lives and won't leave the home, or communicating about the publicly observed whereabouts of law enforcement.
Post reply on HN