4 ms·

Great! Let's put it all over the news!

dmix 8y ago
You can't stop what happens in the courts from becoming public (which is how this information got out). It helps put scrutiny on police tactics anyway, which then helps the average person defend themselves against abuse of power. Law enforcement will always have an advantage over criminals anyway. Even if we know their tactics, they still have full access to phones, networks, business databases, they can coerce people to turn informant, etc, etc, etc. They'll still win. Law enforcement information control is overrated in its utility. Not to mention 99.9% of criminals make dumb mistakes (which is all it takes to get caught, one minor mistake).
- linguistbreaker 8y ago
  I also heard this alternatively phrased as "FBI cracked El Chapo's encrypted comms system by flipping his sysadmin." Not sure whether it makes a difference but the FBI is known for coercion, but the article calls it "recruiting."
- darkpuma 8y ago
  I think you're misreading the concern. It's the difference between public knowledge and common knowledge. The cartel in question would already know about this IT guy, they don't need the media to mention it because it's already public knowledge. But without the media mentioning, it wouldn't be common knowledge. The difference is important to criminals concerned with reputation. If the IT guy was public knowledge but not common knowledge, the cartel would almost certainly be interested in his assassination, to send a message that they're not to be crossed. But with the IT guy being common knowledge, the value of assassinating him skyrockets. Bringing the IT guy into common knowledge could encourage more members of the public to believe the cartel is weak enough to be betrayed. This is obviously good for the authorities, who want more people to betray cartels, but bad for the cartels who control people through fear. The remedy for the cartel is to devote even more manpower to tracking down the IT guy and killing him. These sort of news articles are good for the general public, but dangerous for the individual IT guy.

dmix 8y ago

You can't stop what happens in the courts from becoming public (which is how this information got out). It helps put scrutiny on police tactics anyway, which then helps the average person defend themselves against abuse of power. Law enforcement will always have an advantage over criminals anyway. Even if we know their tactics, they still have full access to phones, networks, business databases, they can coerce people to turn informant, etc, etc, etc. They'll still win. Law enforcement information control is overrated in its utility. Not to mention 99.9% of criminals make dumb mistakes (which is all it takes to get caught, one minor mistake).

linguistbreaker 8y ago
I also heard this alternatively phrased as "FBI cracked El Chapo's encrypted comms system by flipping his sysadmin." Not sure whether it makes a difference but the FBI is known for coercion, but the article calls it "recruiting."
darkpuma 8y ago
I think you're misreading the concern. It's the difference between public knowledge and common knowledge. The cartel in question would already know about this IT guy, they don't need the media to mention it because it's already public knowledge. But without the media mentioning, it wouldn't be common knowledge. The difference is important to criminals concerned with reputation. If the IT guy was public knowledge but not common knowledge, the cartel would almost certainly be interested in his assassination, to send a message that they're not to be crossed. But with the IT guy being common knowledge, the value of assassinating him skyrockets. Bringing the IT guy into common knowledge could encourage more members of the public to believe the cartel is weak enough to be betrayed. This is obviously good for the authorities, who want more people to betray cartels, but bad for the cartels who control people through fear. The remedy for the cartel is to devote even more manpower to tracking down the IT guy and killing him. These sort of news articles are good for the general public, but dangerous for the individual IT guy.