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

IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

news.cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 186 posts

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#71

Post by varjag »

Domenic_S wrote: post #51
varjag wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You send a clear-text message to a publically-accessible service that is empowered to forward the message to other publically-accessible servers if necessary. This is how postal system works.

Uhh... In the postal system, your message is generally encapsulated in a tamper-evident envelope, carried in locked cars and trucks that enjoy Federal protection against intrusion, and end up in mailboxes that are almost always on private property and/or locked.

You can unglue an envelope over steam or on a hot surface.

That's beside the point though. People in general expect their mail correspondence to remain private, although a motivated third party might be able to defeat security.

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#72

Post by mimiflynn »

mikegioia wrote: post #34
mimiflynn wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's email isn't encrypted, it is sent as text over a network. Authentication doesn't change the fact that your email can be intercepted through the network in which it has been sent or received.

It's encrypted if you're sending it to another GMail user or anyone using Google Apps email for their domain.

Slick! Makes me feel a bit better then.

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#74

Post by morsch »

betterunix wrote: post #42
taeric wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I would not argue against encryption giving you privacy, I think it is easy to argue that there is an expectation of privacy in sending emails. At least, as much of one as if you were sending actual correspondence. Consider, in a public restroom there is very little done to prevent people from seeing each other. However, one almost certainly has a reasonable expectation of privacy in such a situation. Hell, con…

We put doors on restrooms. Claiming that unencrypted email should carry a legitimate expectation of privacy is like claiming that people should expect privacy when they go to the bathroom on the side of the highway. People may want their email to be private, but that does not mean that we should pretend that email really is private. Really, we need encryption to be widely used, for people to learn about it in school,…

How do urinals fit into that metaphor?

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#76

Post by varjag »

betterunix wrote: post #42
taeric wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I would not argue against encryption giving you privacy, I think it is easy to argue that there is an expectation of privacy in sending emails. At least, as much of one as if you were sending actual correspondence. Consider, in a public restroom there is very little done to prevent people from seeing each other. However, one almost certainly has a reasonable expectation of privacy in such a situation. Hell, con…

We put doors on restrooms. Claiming that unencrypted email should carry a legitimate expectation of privacy is like claiming that people should expect privacy when they go to the bathroom on the side of the highway. People may want their email to be private, but that does not mean that we should pretend that email really is private. Really, we need encryption to be widely used, for people to learn about it in school,…

You can't normally read SMTP exchange between two arbitrary servers. Granted, there's a range of attacks possible to a motivated hacker, but they are exactly that: attacks. Your email is normally not exposed to third parties.

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#77

Post by kyrias »

brigade wrote: post #59
rayiner wrote: post #3

This statement: "Newly disclosed documents prepared by IRS lawyers says that Americans enjoy 'generally no privacy' in their e-mail, Facebook chats, Twitter direct messages, and similar online communications" is entirely consistent with the existence of Warshack. Warshack covers the Sixth Circuit, which includes the following states: Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. The IRS is bound by this precedent in those…

No, that's stupid. That's equivalent to claiming telephone calls aren't private, because they're transmitted in the clear by third party exchanges accessible to authorized users. (email servers generally aren't publicly accessible, rather they're only accessible to authorized (registered) users)

  email servers generally aren't publicly accessible, rather they're only accessible to authorized (registered) users
Yes, sending email requires authorization to the SMTP server but MTA to MTA communications (as in when your mailserver actually sends your email to the recipients mail server) are clear text and can easily be intercepted.

The difference between telephone calls and email is that you generally don't have access to the things you need to listen in on a telephone call, but email you only need to have access to one of the routers that it's routed through

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#78

Post by hpguy »

rayiner wrote: post #68
kamjam wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lock on my door is to prevent someone from pretending to be me to enter my property. This is not the same as trying to keep my stuff private or safe. Note how your statement does not hold in the real world.

Except Google's servers and whatnot are not your property. The lock keeps other Google customers from accessing "your stuff" not Google itself.

The data I put in Google is MY property, I want that data protected and don't care less about servers just as I do not claim ownership to the school locker.

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#79

Post by rsync »

pyre wrote: post #70
rayiner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't own your gmail inbox, you don't own your twitter account, you don't own your facebook account. Google, Twitter, and Facebook own them. You don't even rent them. Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc, fully own them and fully control them at all times, retaining the right to do whatever they want with them at any time.

You just missed the point. The IRS is speaking to all email systems. If I have a private server in my private house, and I send another message to another user on the same server (i.e. local delivery only), then the IRS's claims still apply to that. I don't see how the Google/Twitter/Facebook come into play here.

The BIG difference is that you'll know about it, because the warrant will go to you. Not only will you know about it, but you can control the timeframe in which you respond as well as explore legal challenges and remedies. You will be in control of how things play out.

The IRS isn't going to break into your mail server.

People should really, really be running their own mail servers, and I suspect should be providing their own dialtone as well. The latter is certainly much more complicated and technical, but that level of control is a very nice thing to have.

Re: IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

#80

Post by kyrias »

palebluedot wrote: post #32
alexanderh wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is why you always use something along the lines of PGP end to end.

The problem is this works only with 2 parties that have already agreed to, and are willing to use, encryption. How many websites, services, and other sources of email have an option to encrypt your email to you with your public key? Not many at all. I've stopped putting my public key on emails I send, because almost no one ever encrypted email to me, unless they were specifically sending something perceived to be sen…

Give me your key and I'll send you one ;)
Post reply on HN