4 ms·

> ok when, not if, law enforcement comes to raid one of our offices, how can we do our best to block a lawful search warrant. When writing end-to-end encrypted

> ok when, not if, law enforcement comes to raid one of our offices, how can we do our best to block a lawful search warrant. When writing end-to-end encrypted chat, client-side encrypted hosting/backup, etc. you ask yourself the same question. And yet I consider those ethical.

StavrosK 9y ago
By that logic, you do the same when you close your door. This is ridiculous, clearly there's a sliding scale of how much morality versus how much immorality you enable. How far along that scale is a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants?
- mynameisvlad 9y ago
  Who says that that's what the end developers were tasked with creating? Maybe they were told they were creating security protocols in place for robberies. We shouldn't make assumptions on what the lowly developer knew or didn't know going into the project, but instead focus on the big wigs who 100% knew what this project was for.
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    I think you can reasonably substitute "developer" for "person" and the grandparent's point still stands.
    - mynameisvlad 9y ago
      Sure, the point I was making is this whole thread is focused on these evil developers who are unethical and immoral and horrible for what they did. Which is the wrong approach. We don't know enough details to know what they knew or didn't know going into the project. If Uber at the highest level is okay with deceiving the government, then it's not crazy to think they wouldn't inform their developers about the potentially illegal things they were going to do. And this was all in 2015-2016 when Uber was still a "scrappy startup" in the people's eyes and not the monster it's been exposed to be. However, we 100% know of people who did know about the project, specifically the higher ups. Our anger should be directed at them because they have no excuse.
      - StavrosK 9y ago
        Oh I'm firmly in the camp of "the fish stinks from the head" (I don't know if this Greek proverb translates, but I think there's a similar one in English).
        throwanem 9y ago
        I've heard it with "rots" in place of "stinks", but otherwise verbatim.
- virgilp 9y ago
  > a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants There's no hint in the article that this was the sole purpose. From the article: > Employees aware of its existence eventually took to calling it Ripley So it was not codenamed from the start, there's an implication that a relatively small circle of users knew it. > Workers in Uber’s IT department were soon tasked with creating a system to keep internal records hidden from intruders Doesn't necessarily seem like something an ethical developer should refuse to do - it could easily be "sold" internally as security software protecting the sensitive information in case of network intrusion.
- zeveb 9y ago
  Depends. Are lawful warrants moral? There are any number of instances in history when the laws have been immoral. Is the use of state power to enforce taxi monopolies immoral?
- Bartweiss 9y ago
  > a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants? From the article: The three people with knowledge of the program say they believe Ripley’s use was justified in some cases because police outside the U.S. didn’t always come with warrants or relied on broad orders to conduct fishing expeditions. Talk about misuse, sure. But there's nothing at all about that tool that restricts it to blocking lawful warrants.
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  >how much morality versus how much immorality Morality and legality are both very subjective, either to the person or to the legal system.

StavrosK 9y ago

By that logic, you do the same when you close your door. This is ridiculous, clearly there's a sliding scale of how much morality versus how much immorality you enable. How far along that scale is a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants?

mynameisvlad 9y ago
Who says that that's what the end developers were tasked with creating? Maybe they were told they were creating security protocols in place for robberies. We shouldn't make assumptions on what the lowly developer knew or didn't know going into the project, but instead focus on the big wigs who 100% knew what this project was for.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  I think you can reasonably substitute "developer" for "person" and the grandparent's point still stands.
  - mynameisvlad 9y ago
    Sure, the point I was making is this whole thread is focused on these evil developers who are unethical and immoral and horrible for what they did. Which is the wrong approach. We don't know enough details to know what they knew or didn't know going into the project. If Uber at the highest level is okay with deceiving the government, then it's not crazy to think they wouldn't inform their developers about the potentially illegal things they were going to do. And this was all in 2015-2016 when Uber was still a "scrappy startup" in the people's eyes and not the monster it's been exposed to be. However, we 100% know of people who did know about the project, specifically the higher ups. Our anger should be directed at them because they have no excuse.
    - StavrosK 9y ago
      Oh I'm firmly in the camp of "the fish stinks from the head" (I don't know if this Greek proverb translates, but I think there's a similar one in English).
      - throwanem 9y ago
        I've heard it with "rots" in place of "stinks", but otherwise verbatim.
virgilp 9y ago
> a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants There's no hint in the article that this was the sole purpose. From the article: > Employees aware of its existence eventually took to calling it Ripley So it was not codenamed from the start, there's an implication that a relatively small circle of users knew it. > Workers in Uber’s IT department were soon tasked with creating a system to keep internal records hidden from intruders Doesn't necessarily seem like something an ethical developer should refuse to do - it could easily be "sold" internally as security software protecting the sensitive information in case of network intrusion.
zeveb 9y ago
Depends. Are lawful warrants moral? There are any number of instances in history when the laws have been immoral. Is the use of state power to enforce taxi monopolies immoral?
Bartweiss 9y ago
> a tool whose sole purpose is to block lawful warrants? From the article: The three people with knowledge of the program say they believe Ripley’s use was justified in some cases because police outside the U.S. didn’t always come with warrants or relied on broad orders to conduct fishing expeditions. Talk about misuse, sure. But there's nothing at all about that tool that restricts it to blocking lawful warrants.
BearGoesChirp 9y ago
>how much morality versus how much immorality Morality and legality are both very subjective, either to the person or to the legal system.