5 ms·

> It's like asking what make and model of lockpicking tools they used to pick a lock. It is more like asking for the technical specs of the teleportation equip

by woodman 11y ago

> It's like asking what make and model of lockpicking tools they used to pick a lock. It is more like asking for the technical specs of the teleportation equipment they used. It needs to be established that they broke into the right house, because there are all sorts of potential "mistakes" that can be hidden behind secret magical investigative tools.

hvidgaard 11y ago
Not at all. What they had was a lead, they got access and found the real evidence. They wouldn't know if it was the right house or not, that is the nature of a lead, and the person (hopefully a judge) that gave them green light decided if the lead was substansial enough to warrent hacking a citezen and break privacy. The process from start to finish can be public. If they followed protocol and found real evidence that is what matters. They can demand to see warrants and the timeline of the process to determine the legality of what happened, but the technical nature of the exploit adds no additional insight to this.
- woodman 11y ago
  > If they followed protocol and found real evidence that is what matters. That is what is yet to be determined. Trying to shield the process from public scrutiny and justifying it with an appeal to authority is a pretty bad idea. Imagine the same logic applied in the non-digital world: traffic stops conducted with probable cause delivered by a black box and an authoritative "Just trust me, I'm an expert."
  - wldcordeiro 11y ago
    You mean a drug dog?
    - woodman 11y ago
      I think that the unreliability has entered the public consciousness fairly recently, so we'll see how that goes. Polygraphs offer a more positive example, as well as breathalyzers. [0] [0] http://embeddedgurus.com/barr-code/2009/11/breathalyzer-source-code-analysis/ http://embeddedgurus.com/barr-code/2009/11/breathalyzer-sour...
  - hvidgaard 11y ago
    I agree, and if the defendant wants a judge and domain experts to go over it, fine, but the public does not need to know for this particular case.
    - woodman 11y ago
      I'm not sure how that would work without more secrecy (FISA style courts) or compelled silence (NSLs). Before we do that, maybe we should take a moment to reevaluate the premise of state secrets, and the benefits they provide a free society.

by woodman 11y ago

hvidgaard 11y ago

Not at all. What they had was a lead, they got access and found the real evidence. They wouldn't know if it was the right house or not, that is the nature of a lead, and the person (hopefully a judge) that gave them green light decided if the lead was substansial enough to warrent hacking a citezen and break privacy. The process from start to finish can be public. If they followed protocol and found real evidence that is what matters. They can demand to see warrants and the timeline of the process to determine the legality of what happened, but the technical nature of the exploit adds no additional insight to this.

woodman 11y ago
> If they followed protocol and found real evidence that is what matters. That is what is yet to be determined. Trying to shield the process from public scrutiny and justifying it with an appeal to authority is a pretty bad idea. Imagine the same logic applied in the non-digital world: traffic stops conducted with probable cause delivered by a black box and an authoritative "Just trust me, I'm an expert."
- wldcordeiro 11y ago
  You mean a drug dog?
  - woodman 11y ago
    I think that the unreliability has entered the public consciousness fairly recently, so we'll see how that goes. Polygraphs offer a more positive example, as well as breathalyzers. [0] [0] http://embeddedgurus.com/barr-code/2009/11/breathalyzer-source-code-analysis/ http://embeddedgurus.com/barr-code/2009/11/breathalyzer-sour...
- hvidgaard 11y ago
  I agree, and if the defendant wants a judge and domain experts to go over it, fine, but the public does not need to know for this particular case.
  - woodman 11y ago
    I'm not sure how that would work without more secrecy (FISA style courts) or compelled silence (NSLs). Before we do that, maybe we should take a moment to reevaluate the premise of state secrets, and the benefits they provide a free society.