4 ms·
If law enforcement has a valid search warrant to access the data stored on a device then the "how" is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how they bypass the encrypt
by 7174n6 6y ago
If law enforcement has a valid search warrant to access the data stored on a device then the "how" is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how they bypass the encryption, self created forensic tools or vodoo encantation, the action is legal. The lawsuit will go nowhere and they know it. It is a fundraising ploy.
What the ACLU should be demanding is "show us the warrants".
- iancarroll 6y agoYou haven't read the article.
- bawolff 6y agoAccording to the article, they are suing related to FOIA record requests. Whether or not the fbi is doing something illegal with encryption sounds pretty unrelated to whether their response to the foia request was legal. Ianal
- mminer237 6y agoI don't see how that has any legal merit. There's a FOIA exemption for "Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that . . . Would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law".
- mijoharas 6y ago> What the ACLU should be demanding is "show us the warrants". Before the ACLU can ask that, they need to see that the FBI are breaking encryption. This is shown in some court documents (where there are warrants). So the ACLU asked the FBI, hey, are you breaking into phones, as these court documents say? (probably so they can ask the follow up, "show us the warrants"). The FBI then responded. I'm not saying a damn thing! not gonna even confirm whether we've broken into anything. NOPE. At which point, how can the ACLU ask to see warrants. The fbi need to say that they are breaking into phones (as court documents state) which they won't even do, so the ACLU are suing to say "hey that's not fair, you definitely are doing that, don't deny it."