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

FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 417 posts

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#51

Post by jlgaddis »

Zhenya wrote: post #38

“ultimately measured in a mounting number of victims — men, women and children who are the victims of crimes, crimes that could have been prevented if law enforcement had been given lawful access to encrypted evidence," I don't understand this. How would getting into his phone post facto stop the shooting? Do they have a time machine?

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold up.

You're not supposed to think critically or ask any questions. Just quietly go about your life, be an obedient citizen, don't make any ruckus, and, of course, trust the government -- they know what's best for you and me and have nothing but our best interests in mind! Unfortunately, they won't be able to stop all of the pedophile terrorists from getting to us if they don't have access to everything. They're "going dark", remember!?

Why don't you want to give them this access anyways? Just what is it that YOU are hiding? What don't you want them to see?

---

> ... crimes that could have been prevented if law enforcement had been given lawful access to encrypted evidence.

That's an earlier quote from Barr (prior to these shootings).

The implication is that if they had access to all of the encrypted communications in real-time (iMessages, WhatsApp, etc.) that law enforcement maybe could have prevented these deaths from happening (nevermind their "track record" for preventing these types of incidents or the fact that most of these shootings are conducted by a single person)...

...but if they aren't able to read all of our messages then of course they can't do anything and so people will continue to die.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#53

Post by kennywinker »

mikejb wrote: post #43
djsumdog wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wondering this too. The person already killed a bunch of people. The person is dead. What more to they hope to gain? Some secret cell of others? Unlikely .. and if there is, why not regular warrants, wiretaps, e-mail searches, etc. They already have sooo many tools they can use, both with a warrant and bypassing it via FISA. They had all this domestic spying stuff and still couldn't prevent the shooting! They get…

Probably to understand motive, and check for potential involvement of others. And whilst they have a metric shit-ton of spying capabilities on US civilians, those are not really intended to avoid crime. (Maybe the shift of perception of what is terrorism might change that, though)

He posted a manifesto online. Think his motive was pretty clearly outlined in it.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#54

Post by mirimir »

ben_w wrote: post #52

Is the American government position “Guns don’t kill people, encryption kills people”, or am I just combining the personal opinions of a bunch of unrelated people who work for the government?

It's a little more nuanced than that.

More like "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." plus "Encryption hinders us from finding people who commit crimes."

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#55

Post by pdkl95 »

bredren wrote: post #50
pdkl95 wrote: post #49

> Attorney General William Barr said in a speech last month that encrypted messaging services allow "criminals to operate with impunity." The cost of encryption is “ultimately measured in a mounting number of victims — men, women and children who are the victims of crimes, crimes that could have been prevented if law enforcement had been given lawful access to encrypted evidence," This disgraceful, emotionally manipu…

It isn’t just detective work, it is personnel with the skills to identify and pursue likely evidence. Digital forensics is way outside typical leo training and believe it or not you can make a lot more money in the private sector with IT training. Local, state and federal case loads get backlogged behind, leaving the highest priority cases to get staffed.

> Digital forensics is way outside typical leo training

That's the problem: attempting to prevent important new technology (actually-secure encryption) from being used is not a substitute for updated training that provides "typical leo" with digital forensics skills that are increasingly needed.

Susan Landau's 2016 testimony before the House Judiciary Committee regarding Apple's encryption on the San Bernardino shooter's iphone:

>> "Instead of embracing the communications and device security we so badly need for securing US public and private data, law enforcement continues to press hard to undermine security in the misguided desire to preserve simple, but outdated, investigative techniques."

>> "We need 21st century techniques to secure the data that 21st century enemies—organized crime and nation-state attackers—seek to steal and exploit. Twentieth century approaches that provide law enforcement with the ability to investigate but also simplify exploitations and attacks are not in our national security interest. Instead of laws and regulation that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop 21st century capabilities for conducting investigations."

>> "Developing such capabilities will involve deep changed for the Bureau, which remains agent-based, not technology-based."

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#56

Post by mirimir »

lph wrote: post #41
sehugg wrote: post #12

“It is prudent to anticipate that a major incident may well occur at any time that will galvanize public opinion on these issues ... Whether we end up with legislation or not, the best course for everyone involved is to work soberly and in good faith together to craft appropriate solutions, rather than have outcomes dictated during a crisis.” -- AG William Barr, July 23 2019 "Never let a good crisis go to waste" -- W…

> "...best course for everyone involved is to work soberly and in good faith..." Well, AG Barr is probably sober. I'll give him that.

Maybe so. Except perhaps for some prescribed pharmaceuticals. Plus endogenous neurotransmitters, and chemical mediators.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#57

Post by [deleted] »

djsumdog wrote: post #25
SimeVidas wrote: post #20

Why is it important that the FBI can access that person’s phone?

I'm wondering this too. The person already killed a bunch of people. The person is dead. What more to they hope to gain? Some secret cell of others? Unlikely .. and if there is, why not regular warrants, wiretaps, e-mail searches, etc. They already have sooo many tools they can use, both with a warrant and bypassing it via FISA. They had all this domestic spying stuff and still couldn't prevent the shooting! They get…

[deleted]

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#58

Post by adventured »

ben_w wrote: post #52

Is the American government position “Guns don’t kill people, encryption kills people”, or am I just combining the personal opinions of a bunch of unrelated people who work for the government?

The position is actually: never let a tragedy or crisis pass by without trying to use it to expand the power of the government.

They have no such actual position regarding encryption killing people, they're entirely flexible, able and more than willing to sway with the wind when it presents. Whether or not encryption kills people, so to speak, is not their concern, it's nothing more than the opportunistic excuse framing. They'll use anything that will stick, anything that gets the result they're seeking.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#59

Post by ethanwillis »

kennywinker wrote: post #53
mikejb wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably to understand motive, and check for potential involvement of others. And whilst they have a metric shit-ton of spying capabilities on US civilians, those are not really intended to avoid crime. (Maybe the shift of perception of what is terrorism might change that, though)

He posted a manifesto online. Think his motive was pretty clearly outlined in it.

Did he? I thought that was the El Paso shooter.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#60

Post by godelski »

mirimir wrote: post #54
ben_w wrote: post #52

Is the American government position “Guns don’t kill people, encryption kills people”, or am I just combining the personal opinions of a bunch of unrelated people who work for the government?

It's a little more nuanced than that. More like "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." plus "Encryption hinders us from finding people who commit crimes."

It's a little more nuanced than that.

More like "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" plus "Pareto is a pain and maybe if we fight encryption we can get public support but we don't want to break it because post hoc analysis doesn't actually help us catch the next guy because Pareto is a pain."

Post reply on HN