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

FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 129 posts

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#91

Post by roninb »

pc86 wrote: post #61
geggam wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973) the Fifth Amendment “not only protects the individual against being involuntarily called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution, but also privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings

You have no such protection if you won't be incriminated by the answers (e.g. they are asking you about someone else). You can of course be involuntarily called as a witness in proceedings where you're not being prosecuted.

AFAIK, (and IANAL), you would have to be certain the questions did not incriminate you. In other words, "pc86, were you or were you not on your couch May the 5th at 8PM EST?" "I plead the fifth." "Your honor, this doesn't incriminate the witness." "pc86, you must answer the question because it is non-incriminating." And of course if it was incriminating, the appellate lawyers would win resoundingly.

Logically, it would follow that if you don't know what a question IS, you can 'plead the fifth' to it on the basis that it could be incriminating. But again, IANAL.

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#92

Post by at-fates-hands »

grecy wrote: post #64

> “But… if we happen to run into her on the street, we’re gonna be asking her some questions without you present.” Impressive for a LEO to state out loud he doesn't care about rights and due process. Like maybe he thinks he's above the law.

This is a classic psyops move on their part.

Get the person thinking they're not safe anywhere, so they stop going out, stop being mobile and stick to a more confined area. Once they've determined where she is, it makes it a lot easier to get in contact with her.

If she's smart, she start moving more frequently, and travel in states where they don't have field offices, avoid air travel and create a constantly moving target for the FBI officers trying to nail her down.

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#93

Post by [deleted] »

penagwin wrote: post #9
unlinker wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only that this is not a sexual setting and the fact it is a "she" changes nothing in this context.

The point still stands. If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way, no matter their gender, race, etc. It becomes harassment. The FBI is a government organization that you could argue has the job of doing this, however they fail to ever state why they require her assistance (and they seem kinda rude to me).

[deleted]

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#94

Post by Kristine1975 »

appleflaxen wrote: post #56
warmblood wrote: post #22

This is terrorism. Given what we all know based on past events about how the FBI conducts their activities, there is no way any reasonably aware citizen can conduct their life normally after such an encounter. The last discussion thread on this topic had more than a few people complaining that Isis (the given name of the developer in the article) is overreacting and paranoid, which is a saddening response to see. It…

It /is/ terrorism, but the FBI is not the agent of terror. Rather, they are reacting to terrorist boogeymen in the shadows, exactly how the terrorists want them to. Terrorism is successful when our society becomes more of an authoritarian police state.

Are they reacting to terrorism? Or are they using terrorism as a pretext to expand their powers (or to achieve whatever goal they have)?

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#95

Post by rayiner »

ryanlol wrote: post #28
pfg wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think sending an email would legally count as a served subpoena, at least not unless you somehow (at the very least, but I doubt that's sufficient) indicated that you're fine with that? I'm not familiar with how this is practiced in the U.S., but in many EU countries, "regular" email is essentially useless in a court of law, even more so for something like a subpoena which needs to be served in person.

Email is definitely a valid way of serving subpoenas.

I don't know any jurisdiction where email is a valid way of serving a subpoena. There is actually a little bit of debate about it, but most people agree that in the federal system, a subpoena must be hand-delivered.

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#96

Post by tzaman »

Why does everyone, including Ms. Lovecruft conclude that something is horribly wrong and that FBI wanting to speak with them means they are in deep shit? I'm by no means defending them, but to me, the whole (original) post looks overly paranoid.

I'm not an American, you can speak with Police freely here in Slovenia, so maybe I understand things wrong?

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#97

Post by at-fates-hands »

joezydeco wrote: post #89
Bartweiss wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part about "meeting her on the street" is particularly slimy. Declining to pass questions through a lawyer is shady, but asking a person to confirm their lawyer's identity as a trap to question them is bizarre. The whole thing reads like its either an agency involved in something unethical, or an agency so far removed from decent behavior that they no longer notice when they're menacing innocents.

It sounds more like a subtle way to say "we'll meet you on the street, after a SWAT team drags you out of bed at 2:00AM"

She's smart by putting this out there now. Even if they detain her for some unknown reason, she can still contact her attorney, who then alerts the local and national media and now the FBI have a firestorm of publicity they don't want. Along with several lawsuits I'm sure her attorney would file immediately.

Sure, they can do that, but the repercussions are something they certainly don't want to deal with.

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#98

Post by Kristine1975 »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #92
grecy wrote: post #64

> “But… if we happen to run into her on the street, we’re gonna be asking her some questions without you present.” Impressive for a LEO to state out loud he doesn't care about rights and due process. Like maybe he thinks he's above the law.

This is a classic psyops move on their part. Get the person thinking they're not safe anywhere, so they stop going out, stop being mobile and stick to a more confined area. Once they've determined where she is, it makes it a lot easier to get in contact with her. If she's smart, she start moving more frequently, and travel in states where they don't have field offices, avoid air travel and create a constantly moving…

>If she's smart, she start moving more frequently...

I don't think that's practical. It would cause her a lot of stress (not to mention cost quite some money) and sooner or later wear her out.

It also means that the FBI has reached their goal of intimidating her, since she is changing her behavior because of them (assuming that is their goal of course).

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#99

Post by lmm »

danielweber wrote: post #70
nothrabannosir wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could an NSL require you to leave canaries in place?

If you are required not to communicate something, then you don't communicate it. Period. Hackers are bad at thinking "oh, I'll just not not not not do the thing, and it will all be okay, I'm so clever." They imagine they are Captain Kirk talking a computer to death. No one has ever been as smart as them! We wouldn't let a CEO route around insider trading laws with a "I don't say this is a good time to buy my stock" c…

And yet there are cases where the US constitution leads to this kind of weirdness. Safes in the US use combinations rather than keys (unlike most of the world), because bizarrely enough the authorities can (AIUI) get a warrant that forces you to give up a key, but not (or it's harder) to force you to disclose a combination. So it's not so implausible that there would be a similar legal technicality that was relevant here.

Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why

#100

Post by bazzargh »

hodwik wrote: post #78

"If they ask for information on anyone else, or think I witnessed or committed some crime: I solemnly invoke my Miranda rights. No joking. No snark. No fucking around. Everyone knows you don’t talk to the police." I'd just like to point out that 1984 and X-Files were works of fiction. I know you consumed them at a really impressionable age, and it was really exciting to think about, but this subculture's complete cre…

You'd get the same advice if you spoke to a lawyer. Here's one:

https://popehat.com/2014/01/15/the-privilege-to-shut-up/

One of the most consistent messages I offer here is about interactions with law enforcement, and can be expressed in two words — shut up

Post reply on HN