4 ms·

The fact that the most damning evidence they could come up with was this line with the inserted "[drug trafficking]" is telling. Reading the full complaint they

The fact that the most damning evidence they could come up with was this line with the inserted "[drug trafficking]" is telling. Reading the full complaint they do not include the supporting context for that insertion which makes me highly suspicious whether it is justified.

cornholio 9y ago
Another sign of the flimsy evidence is the mention that some customers used gangsta email address. Please, them and every 12 y/o I know. This has entrapment written all over it. It's impossible for a service provider to ascertain if his customer is really breaking the law from his email handle or from such conversations. He might simply be making an analogy or reductio ad absurdum. What now, I'm supposed to say, "no, my security product can't resist an attack from law enforcement" although all crypto and math experts say it should? It's like coercing a gun dealer to say his product can't possibly kill cops in any circumstance. The prosecution will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the providers were privy to the nature of their customer's business and conspired with them to hide illegal activities from law enforcement.
saas_co_de 9y ago
Basing an indictment on what a salesperson says while trying to sell a product is fundamentally ridiculous. Obviously a salesperson is going to be as positive as possible and respond affirmatively to everything the person they are selling to says. Even if the guy said: "we designed these phones specifically for international drug traffickers" that still does not prove anything because it is just a hypothetical to illustrate that the technology is robust in adversarial environments. The whole thing is really very embarrassing for the FBI. They can't make any real cases and so they come up with this as an excuse. Meanwhile, impact on real world crime is zero (or worse) because this just shows criminals, once again, that they cannot trust any centralized service or device and to either stay off electronics entirely or build your own in house.
lightbyte 9y ago
You may have missed this part: >Phantom can also remotely wipe devices in the event they are seized by authorities. >The RCMP also pretended that authorities had arrested an associate with incriminating evidence on the phone, and needed Phantom to wipe the device. That seems to be actively participating in trafficking from the company, as well as potentially destroying evidence.

cornholio 9y ago

Another sign of the flimsy evidence is the mention that some customers used gangsta email address. Please, them and every 12 y/o I know. This has entrapment written all over it. It's impossible for a service provider to ascertain if his customer is really breaking the law from his email handle or from such conversations. He might simply be making an analogy or reductio ad absurdum. What now, I'm supposed to say, "no, my security product can't resist an attack from law enforcement" although all crypto and math experts say it should? It's like coercing a gun dealer to say his product can't possibly kill cops in any circumstance. The prosecution will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the providers were privy to the nature of their customer's business and conspired with them to hide illegal activities from law enforcement.

saas_co_de 9y ago

Basing an indictment on what a salesperson says while trying to sell a product is fundamentally ridiculous. Obviously a salesperson is going to be as positive as possible and respond affirmatively to everything the person they are selling to says. Even if the guy said: "we designed these phones specifically for international drug traffickers" that still does not prove anything because it is just a hypothetical to illustrate that the technology is robust in adversarial environments. The whole thing is really very embarrassing for the FBI. They can't make any real cases and so they come up with this as an excuse. Meanwhile, impact on real world crime is zero (or worse) because this just shows criminals, once again, that they cannot trust any centralized service or device and to either stay off electronics entirely or build your own in house.

lightbyte 9y ago

You may have missed this part: >Phantom can also remotely wipe devices in the event they are seized by authorities. >The RCMP also pretended that authorities had arrested an associate with incriminating evidence on the phone, and needed Phantom to wipe the device. That seems to be actively participating in trafficking from the company, as well as potentially destroying evidence.