Get a fucking subpoena you asshole motherfuckers.
U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
151–160 of 350 posts
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#152I 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. 695 the last time around, which would have done the latter. Read it for yourself:
"Whoever, after January 31, 2000, sells in interstate or foreign commerce any encryption product that does not include features or functions permitting duly authorized persons immediate access to plaintext or immediate decryption capabilities shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined under this title, or both..."
"After January 31, 2000, it shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture for distribution, DISTRIBUTE, or import encryption products intended for sale or use in the United States, unless that product-- `(1) includes features or functions that provide an immediate access to plaintext capability... requiring any person in possession of decryption information to provide such information to a duly authorized investigative or law enforcement officer..." (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr108p4&dbna...)
Note the distribution ban above. That would have hit open-source and free software projects.
Put another way, implementation details matter. A lot of voters might agree with the general proposition that law enforcement should have a way to snoop on terrorists|child pornographers|drug kingpins. They might not agree that a 14-year HN reader with a forked version of Android|AOSP on Github should go to prison for 20 years because he dared to distribute an unencrypted OS.
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#153They 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 talk about a balancing act and a criminal underworld free for all but I haven't seen too many complaints from the FBI about the millions of Americans whose constitutional rights are infringed upon every day during the NSA's total government free for all (as well as the wide variety of stories pertaining to other agencies and local law enforcement which are abusing various forms of intelligence gathering).
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#154I 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…
Apple has staked their reputation on the line and said "send us an NSL if you like, we have nothing we can give you". And the cryptographic principles, if executed properly, are sound. Maybe they're lying. Maybe Snowden 2.0 will come out next year and tell us the truth and instantly destroy their credibility. That's a gamble I wouldn't take with my company, but it's plausible. See I figure, if you're a threat to Nati…
What makes you think it's such a big gamble? People just don't care about privacy as much as the news would have you believe.
Don't believe me? Quick, think of one of the largest and most consistently flagrant private entities who violates the privacy of its users on a regular basis, and is well known for it.
Did you say Google? Facebook? Now quickly think of two of the largest companies on the Internet, both in revenue, and traffic volume.
Apple isn't taking nearly the risk you're suggesting, because people just don't care.
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#155Outside of having a plethora of security experts audit and certify these services I'd say this is about as close as you can get to a ringing endorsement. The only way it gets better is if other governments follow up with the same complaints. Ultimately I'm pleased that this kind of thing even makes the news. Ideally government becomes almost totally transparent and private matters become nearly opaque (there will alw…
If the government were happy with their level of access, they wouldn't stop pushing for more because a) it reveals their hand and b) it weakens their position to acquire more power.
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#156This seems like one of the most obvious media presses I've ever seen. I can't decide whether it's good to see the press that security is getting, and have the same terrible LE quotes show up, or bad that there is such widespread dissemination that LE is unhappy about this and hey if you're a good citizen you will buy a phone we can more easily unlock. Here are the same or similar articles: -WSJ 8[1] and 5[2] days ago…
Whether or not its a coordinated media blitz or just journalists piggybacking on each other for content I don't know. That it is coming out at the same time new iPhones could go either way.
Things that people are completely missing about this story: -Big difference between domestic & local law enforcement and NSA/DoD/CIA. Nothing prevents backdooring of a phone or someone spying as the user enters their simple password. Local law enforcement doesn't have these resources and has gotten used to access to all kinds of evidence that never existed. What Apple may or may not have done just pushes the cost up.
-I think Apple is very scared about being locked out of the Chinese market right now. The new iPhones have not been approved yet last I heard. This is a big fucking deal that would wipe out a huge chunk of Apple's market cap. They are not going to budge because some local law enforcement officers claim only child molesters use iPhones.
-Google is in a similar boat except they are already locked out of China, likely will get locked out of Russia soon. They would like to be able to still make money in Brazil and the EU.
-I think it is a good trend for the pushback from tech companies. There is no good answer for international legal compliance for user records. Records should be accessible once an account has been compromised locally, not because any judge in any country on earth can search all of your user data on any user in any other country. Between Dropbox, Dropcam & all of these other cloud services, right now a user has no idea who has access to all of their data all of the time. Time travel back two decades, no one is stealing all of your data over a dial up modem. Nor is a device recording every square foot of where you are at every moment. The tools law enforcement have access to right now are godlike
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#157I 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 children!"
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this argument. Wouldn't law enforcement still be allowed to access phone records unecrypted if they have an actual suspect and court order?
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.
"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 inside your phone - the baseband processor and the SIM card.[1] Your carrier has access (OTA updates, etc.) to the baseband processor and can load new code/functions on it without your knowledge at any time. Depending on the SOC your phone is based on, the baseband processor can have DMA access to your application processor. What that means is, the baseband processor (which you have no control over whatsoever) can read your RAM directly.
Your cryptosystem that you describe probably works quite well on a desktop or laptop computer, but your carrier completely and totally owns your phone and everything on it.
... and we haven't even gotten to what they can do with the SIM card ...
[1] Yes, the SIM card is a computer with its own processor, RAM and programs running on it right this moment.
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. They could use a warrant to compel the sender or the recipient of the messages to unlock them or face jail time. But Apple doesn't have the keys.
wouldn't the 5th amendment protect against that?
I think the most important thing here is that law enforcement must approach the individual. What happens next may end up a complicate web of legal acrobatics, but the individual at least knows the law is after them. That's a good thing, IMHO. If your privacy is being violated by police forcing you to open your phone to them... at least you know the "when", "how" and "what" info they're getting. I'm also pretty sure you'd at least have a strong suspicion on the "why" it's happening to you as well - fair or otherwise.
Re: U.S. Law Enforcement Seeks to Halt Apple-Google Encryption of Mobile Data
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've noticed the increase in availability for secure phones (as in, there were zero before and now there is one), but even working in information security, I've never heard of anyone outside of Ars Technica or the like actually buying one, let alone using it. I wouldn't really call that a sharp increase in popularity except, of course, the sharp increase of going from zero to one.
Most drug dealers or johns I see just buy a prepaid phone from Walgreens, i.e. a booty phone. Tracfone doesn't verify whatever you activate with, you can just make up whatever name/address.
That's not really a secure phone or black phone, that's just a prepaid phone. Nothing inherently secure about it other than it's difficult to trace. The parent was talking about purposefully secured phones with encrypted phone call and messaging, etc.