161–170 of 206 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing to me too that the very concept of an "unwarrantable" space is simply impossible to conceive.
Considering all communication is subject to eavesdropping the space they are wanting to access borders on the realm of private thoughts. And some day soon it just may exist in that realm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-ZpsxnmmbE
CGP Grey has a very good explanation of this situation.
Same article on the FT: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/af23e3ea-07f1-11e6-b6d3-746f8e9cdd... James Comey, director of the FBI, said on Thursday that the cost was “worth it”, but added that an accommodation needed to be made with Apple and other technology companies in the future, as paying outside technologists to find ways to access highly-encrypted messages on phones used by terrorist suspects was not “scalable.”
> was not “scalable.” This is the same James Comey that said they just were just asking Apple for access to just that one phone.
Is that it? Had they found a way to do it internally it could easily have cost 10x more.
Same article on the FT: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/af23e3ea-07f1-11e6-b6d3-746f8e9cdd... James Comey, director of the FBI, said on Thursday that the cost was “worth it”, but added that an accommodation needed to be made with Apple and other technology companies in the future, as paying outside technologists to find ways to access highly-encrypted messages on phones used by terrorist suspects was not “scalable.”
(If it were relevant to myself and others, someone would create a non-paywalled version of the story, maybe so simply as just retyping here what they've read elsewhere. Humans see censorship, paywalls, etc as damage and route around them, as long as positive value is generated.)
$180k is a dangerously small amount to pay someone with James Comey's responsibility.
I wish people who paid lots of government money for things were always forced to do so out of their salary. For example: we will pay you $X per year in exchange for giving you the responsibility to make up to 10 big purchases; each time you purchase however, 1% of the proposed sum comes out of that $X salary; now then, how judicious will you be? One thing Ron Paul did in Congress years ago, after one of those stupid…
To me this raises a question about selling security vulnerabilities to state actors in general (in the context of the Facebook vulnerability thread where the standard discussion about value is being hashed out). Specifically, I live in the UK and one of the complaints law enforcement has is that US companies can (and do) totally ignore valid court orders because they don't apply in the US (reddit being an arbitrary c…
> Specifically, I live in the UK and one of the complaints law enforcement has is that US companies can (and do) totally ignore valid court orders because they don't apply in the US (reddit being an arbitrary concrete example). A US company (or individual) should absolutely ignore court orders from a non-US court; such courts have no jurisdiction. A "valid" court order necessarily must come from a court with jurisdic…
Remember: US privacy protections (e.g. 4th Amendment) don't apply to non-US people outside the USA. Please fix US courts & law to actually give us protection.
Same article on the FT: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/af23e3ea-07f1-11e6-b6d3-746f8e9cdd... James Comey, director of the FBI, said on Thursday that the cost was “worth it”, but added that an accommodation needed to be made with Apple and other technology companies in the future, as paying outside technologists to find ways to access highly-encrypted messages on phones used by terrorist suspects was not “scalable.”
It was all a ruse to get their precedent for backdoors, and now they're dripping this (probably bullshit) story to the media in a way that further progresses their agenda, after classifying the information in the first place.