4 ms·

A warrant must name the specific persons/places/things to be searched. A automatic dragnet search isn't required with a warrant. > it’s known that illegal con

by nullc 5y ago

A warrant must name the specific persons/places/things to be searched. A automatic dragnet search isn't required with a warrant. > it’s known that illegal content exists A point of clarification: The system divulges the encryption keys to content when the content's "perceptual hash" matches one in the database the specific user is being tested against. Apple claims that the hashes are provided by NCMEC "and other parties". It is already known that the NCMEC databases has at least some hits for non-illegal content. Who knows what these databases might contain in the future. There is certainly no structural requirement in the system that the content is illegal or some specific kind of illegal. For users in Thailand the apple database could just as well be full of hashes of cartoons insulting to the monarch (which are illegal there, as I understand it) and no one would be able to tell, at least not before apple users started being rounded up and summarily executed.

dpkonofa 5y ago
Yes but the criteria for a warrant can be nothing more than reasonable suspicion. So a warrant could be issued for access to someone’s entire device regardless of whether objectionable content exists on it or not. Theoretically, a government could issue a warrant for every single person’s phone and get what they want. This prevents anything even close to that from happening because users aren’t required to provide the keys and Apple won’t have them unless that content matches what’s on the list. On your second point, yes… that’s a very real possibility and one that I’m sure Apple has already considered and has responded to.
- bigiain 5y ago
  > Theoretically, a government could issue a warrant for every single person’s phone and get what they want. For that you'd need a sham court full of rubber stamping judges handing out bogus search warrants for every single questionable and illegal request that comes to them. That seems a stretch of the imagination? What judge would to _that?_ We could call that the FISA Court, right?
  - dpkonofa 5y ago
    Glad I’m not the only one.
  - bostik 5y ago
    No, you need just one: "every phone connected to at least two of these N base stations over this 48-hour window". Which is quite a modern take on a historically reviled phenomenon, so you should call them for what they are: general warrants.
blisterol 5y ago
>hashes are provided by NCMEC "and other parties". It is already known that the NCMEC databases has at least some hits for non-illegal content. They're coming for the memes. Not sure whether I'm joking or not.

by nullc 5y ago

dpkonofa 5y ago

Yes but the criteria for a warrant can be nothing more than reasonable suspicion. So a warrant could be issued for access to someone’s entire device regardless of whether objectionable content exists on it or not. Theoretically, a government could issue a warrant for every single person’s phone and get what they want. This prevents anything even close to that from happening because users aren’t required to provide the keys and Apple won’t have them unless that content matches what’s on the list. On your second point, yes… that’s a very real possibility and one that I’m sure Apple has already considered and has responded to.

bigiain 5y ago
> Theoretically, a government could issue a warrant for every single person’s phone and get what they want. For that you'd need a sham court full of rubber stamping judges handing out bogus search warrants for every single questionable and illegal request that comes to them. That seems a stretch of the imagination? What judge would to _that?_ We could call that the FISA Court, right?
- dpkonofa 5y ago
  Glad I’m not the only one.
- bostik 5y ago
  No, you need just one: "every phone connected to at least two of these N base stations over this 48-hour window". Which is quite a modern take on a historically reviled phenomenon, so you should call them for what they are: general warrants.

blisterol 5y ago

>hashes are provided by NCMEC "and other parties". It is already known that the NCMEC databases has at least some hits for non-illegal content. They're coming for the memes. Not sure whether I'm joking or not.