4 ms·

>I guess I’m biased since this is essentially my whole livelihood, but this is crazy, right? There's clearly a valid argument from the other side. For example

by treis 6y ago

>I guess I’m biased since this is essentially my whole livelihood, but this is crazy, right? There's clearly a valid argument from the other side. For example: >Facebook announced in March plans to encrypt Messenger, which last year was responsible for nearly 12 million of the 18.4 million worldwide reports of child sexual abuse material, according to people familiar with the reports. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/28/us/child-sex-abuse.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/28/us/child-sex-... It's not clear how many of those lead to convictions but even a tiny fraction of a percent represents a significant number of children being rescued. Encrypting Messenger, as an example, will stop 3/4s of abuse reports and make it much safer and easier for paedophiles to exchange images. There's a pretty direct line from that decision to an increase in abuses like: >“inserting an ice cube into the vagina” of a young girl, the documents said, before tying her ankles together, taping her mouth shut and suspending her upside down. As the video continued, the girl was beaten, slapped and burned with a match or candle. >“The predominant sound is the child screaming and crying,” according to a federal agent quoted in the documents.

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
as horrible as this is do you think that banning encryption will put an end to the abuse itself? I'm actually convinced that all this does is reduce the sharing of such material, e.g. what people are outraged with is usually not only the act in itself but the fact that some sickos get off on this material. but I wouldn't think for a moment that because of some law less kids will be abused. I'm actually fine with some kids biting the dust (yes literally being killed) to prevent the greater evil which is that of normalization of mass-surveillance within society (any more than it is already) which will ultimately destroy more lives. I'm not saying these kids don't deserve justice but more power to cops never solves anything (especially in poor volatile countries where cops are in fact part of the problem and happy to look away ...)
- treis 6y ago
  >as horrible as this is do you think that banning encryption will put an end to the abuse itself? No, but there's a huge excluded middle between the level of abuse with easy E2E encryption and no abuse. >prevent the greater evil which is that of normalization of mass-surveillance within society (any more than it is already) which will ultimately destroy more lives. Facebook has been around for 15 years now without E2E encryption. I have not noticed lives being destroyed but perhaps you can share examples? >I'm not saying these kids don't deserve justice but more power to cops never solves anything Here's one that comes to mind: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gd9b/facebook-helped-fbi-hack-child-predator-buster-hernandez https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gd9b/facebook-helped-fb... Facebook helped develop a zero day exploit that the FBI used to catch a predator that abused dozens of girls. In this one specific case clearly more power to the cops solved something. I can't cite any numbers, but it seems the majority of convictions I've read have some variation of evidence being found on phones, computers, or from sites like Facebook. It stands to reason that if we saw default E2E encryption across the board it would be a lot harder for the police to get evidence and would lead to a lot fewer convictions.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    > It stands to reason that if we saw default E2E encryption across the board it would be a lot harder for the police to get evidence and would lead to a lot fewer convictions. I am firmly-albeit-reluctantly OK with this, if the alternative is widespread surveillance of what should logically be private correspondence/communication among private citizens. I value the privacy of the hundreds of millions of the citizen population over a slight increase in the conviction rate of the tens to hundreds of thousands predators.
  - lubesGordi 6y ago
    Agreed. Making encryption the boogeyman is the wrong way, too broad. Ensuring the easily accessible comm channels are accessible to law enforcement, seems like an OK compromise. What those channels are should be the focus of the discussion imo.
    - mttddd 6y ago
      This is my issue with the act, it doesnt spell out who would be subject to this rather leaves it up to the DOJ to spell out the rules later. I am probably in the minority here on HN but I think bundling together encryption with platforms like Facebook/IG is a bad idea given how easy those platforms make it for bad actors to meet/identify potential victims. Signal/whatsapp etc I am ok with since they dont provide that same ability.
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    > No, but there's a huge excluded middle between the level of abuse with easy E2E encryption and no abuse. call me old fashioned but every time I look at porn (which is very rare these days) I am disgusted by the meta-data that is added to these videos. It shows that people love to click on videos that read "stepdad and stepdaughter ..." and similar taglines. America has a problem with the whole "call me daddy" fetish. I never understood what this is about. It's deeply pedophelic imho and it's the main reason why I hate porn. It looks like it's hard to find videos where some form of domination (rough sex) isn't part of it. the way women are treated is IMO the gateway which normalizes violence first against women (even pretend rape is a genre here pushed by pornhub & co). why do people get off on this and why do porn companies get away with it ?? <- my opinion is to start the crackdown on this type of messaging here and before even cracking down have a discussion about wtf is wrong with people? why do they have to strangle each other during sex? > Facebook has been around for 15 years now without E2E encryption. I have not noticed lives being destroyed but perhaps you can share examples? the problem with FB is mostly that it many countries FB _is_ the Internet. Myanmar (the Rohinga's) would be a fitting example. Also the Philipines where the Duarte government is currently using it on their brutal war on drugs. If there would be justice Zuck and anyone working at FB would be rotting in jail even before we discuss pedophelia. thousands in the Philipines have been killed thanks to Duarte's messaging. FB literally kills and gets away with it. FB agreeing to develop 0days to crack down on a few cases doesn't make them the good guys. I believe the world would be better off if FB wouldn't exist at all. Vice is also known to push a pro-cop pro-LE agenda. I stopped watching their videos and reading their content when they showed how cannabis production in Albania hurts Europe (wtf) ... they are a pro-cop & ultra-conservative outlet. Screw vice and screw cops. > I can't cite any numbers, but it seems the majority of convictions I've read have some variation of evidence being found on phones, I know security companies love to cite their work with law-enforcement and how they help fight crime. when I had an interview with the biggest Swiss security company few years ago they bragged about their work with Interpol and how they help fight the bad guys. But nobody ever mentions that the software companies like NSO, Gamma, HackingTeam makes doesn't just allow LS to compromise phones (people assume it's read-only) when reality is the features are always read-write. Putting things on these devices is possible because from an engineering pov why would you limit a feature and not allow write access ... I know enough cops who brag about how they abuse their power . So why would I trust them not to plant shit on these phones (especially when they're convinced that they're dealing with a bad guy).
tumetab1 6y ago
Why would it stop abuse reports? FB Messager report function sends a decrypted copy to Facebook AFAIK.
- suizi 6y ago
  If someone is extorting hundreds of girls like Hernandez did, one is bound to send a report in.
suizi 6y ago
How many of these images are re-circulations? How many of them are new images? How much abuse is actually facilitated on the platform? Does directing more resources towards this take away resources and mind share which could be used to tackle more serious crime than someone posting images over and over?

by treis 6y ago

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago

as horrible as this is do you think that banning encryption will put an end to the abuse itself? I'm actually convinced that all this does is reduce the sharing of such material, e.g. what people are outraged with is usually not only the act in itself but the fact that some sickos get off on this material. but I wouldn't think for a moment that because of some law less kids will be abused. I'm actually fine with some kids biting the dust (yes literally being killed) to prevent the greater evil which is that of normalization of mass-surveillance within society (any more than it is already) which will ultimately destroy more lives. I'm not saying these kids don't deserve justice but more power to cops never solves anything (especially in poor volatile countries where cops are in fact part of the problem and happy to look away ...)

treis 6y ago
>as horrible as this is do you think that banning encryption will put an end to the abuse itself? No, but there's a huge excluded middle between the level of abuse with easy E2E encryption and no abuse. >prevent the greater evil which is that of normalization of mass-surveillance within society (any more than it is already) which will ultimately destroy more lives. Facebook has been around for 15 years now without E2E encryption. I have not noticed lives being destroyed but perhaps you can share examples? >I'm not saying these kids don't deserve justice but more power to cops never solves anything Here's one that comes to mind: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gd9b/facebook-helped-fbi-hack-child-predator-buster-hernandez https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gd9b/facebook-helped-fb... Facebook helped develop a zero day exploit that the FBI used to catch a predator that abused dozens of girls. In this one specific case clearly more power to the cops solved something. I can't cite any numbers, but it seems the majority of convictions I've read have some variation of evidence being found on phones, computers, or from sites like Facebook. It stands to reason that if we saw default E2E encryption across the board it would be a lot harder for the police to get evidence and would lead to a lot fewer convictions.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  > It stands to reason that if we saw default E2E encryption across the board it would be a lot harder for the police to get evidence and would lead to a lot fewer convictions. I am firmly-albeit-reluctantly OK with this, if the alternative is widespread surveillance of what should logically be private correspondence/communication among private citizens. I value the privacy of the hundreds of millions of the citizen population over a slight increase in the conviction rate of the tens to hundreds of thousands predators.
- lubesGordi 6y ago
  Agreed. Making encryption the boogeyman is the wrong way, too broad. Ensuring the easily accessible comm channels are accessible to law enforcement, seems like an OK compromise. What those channels are should be the focus of the discussion imo.
  - mttddd 6y ago
    This is my issue with the act, it doesnt spell out who would be subject to this rather leaves it up to the DOJ to spell out the rules later. I am probably in the minority here on HN but I think bundling together encryption with platforms like Facebook/IG is a bad idea given how easy those platforms make it for bad actors to meet/identify potential victims. Signal/whatsapp etc I am ok with since they dont provide that same ability.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  > No, but there's a huge excluded middle between the level of abuse with easy E2E encryption and no abuse. call me old fashioned but every time I look at porn (which is very rare these days) I am disgusted by the meta-data that is added to these videos. It shows that people love to click on videos that read "stepdad and stepdaughter ..." and similar taglines. America has a problem with the whole "call me daddy" fetish. I never understood what this is about. It's deeply pedophelic imho and it's the main reason why I hate porn. It looks like it's hard to find videos where some form of domination (rough sex) isn't part of it. the way women are treated is IMO the gateway which normalizes violence first against women (even pretend rape is a genre here pushed by pornhub & co). why do people get off on this and why do porn companies get away with it ?? <- my opinion is to start the crackdown on this type of messaging here and before even cracking down have a discussion about wtf is wrong with people? why do they have to strangle each other during sex? > Facebook has been around for 15 years now without E2E encryption. I have not noticed lives being destroyed but perhaps you can share examples? the problem with FB is mostly that it many countries FB _is_ the Internet. Myanmar (the Rohinga's) would be a fitting example. Also the Philipines where the Duarte government is currently using it on their brutal war on drugs. If there would be justice Zuck and anyone working at FB would be rotting in jail even before we discuss pedophelia. thousands in the Philipines have been killed thanks to Duarte's messaging. FB literally kills and gets away with it. FB agreeing to develop 0days to crack down on a few cases doesn't make them the good guys. I believe the world would be better off if FB wouldn't exist at all. Vice is also known to push a pro-cop pro-LE agenda. I stopped watching their videos and reading their content when they showed how cannabis production in Albania hurts Europe (wtf) ... they are a pro-cop & ultra-conservative outlet. Screw vice and screw cops. > I can't cite any numbers, but it seems the majority of convictions I've read have some variation of evidence being found on phones, I know security companies love to cite their work with law-enforcement and how they help fight crime. when I had an interview with the biggest Swiss security company few years ago they bragged about their work with Interpol and how they help fight the bad guys. But nobody ever mentions that the software companies like NSO, Gamma, HackingTeam makes doesn't just allow LS to compromise phones (people assume it's read-only) when reality is the features are always read-write. Putting things on these devices is possible because from an engineering pov why would you limit a feature and not allow write access ... I know enough cops who brag about how they abuse their power . So why would I trust them not to plant shit on these phones (especially when they're convinced that they're dealing with a bad guy).

tumetab1 6y ago

Why would it stop abuse reports? FB Messager report function sends a decrypted copy to Facebook AFAIK.

suizi 6y ago
If someone is extorting hundreds of girls like Hernandez did, one is bound to send a report in.

suizi 6y ago

How many of these images are re-circulations? How many of them are new images? How much abuse is actually facilitated on the platform? Does directing more resources towards this take away resources and mind share which could be used to tackle more serious crime than someone posting images over and over?