4 ms·
What if the file was "kiddie porn.zip" or "TOP SECRET: asassination details for operation 'kill obama'" Aren't there some instances where they'd be justified l
by freddyuggs 15y ago
What if the file was "kiddie porn.zip" or "TOP SECRET: asassination details for operation 'kill obama'"
Aren't there some instances where they'd be justified looking at data...
- cperciva 15y agoI'd say in those circumstances they should be phoning the FBI or the secret service rather than looking at the data themselves.
- freddyuggs 15y agoYeah I think I'd agree there.
- Mavrik 15y agoNo. They're not the police or the court, they have no business playing ones. Attitude like yours gives us stupid privacy-violating terrorism and "protect-the-children" laws.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- freddyuggs 15y agoSo you're saying if they notice 'illegal content' on their servers, they'd just leave it there?
- malandrew 15y agoThe fact that they can notice private "illegal content" at all is a violation of trust. If I mark something private, I should expect that it will be private from everyone including employees of that company. While it is reasonable to expect that they would contact the FBI in such instances, I would also hope that noticing such details illicits a "I shouldnt have been able to see that, so we're not doing enough to protect the privacy of our clients" response and corrective actions.
- freddyuggs 15y agoWhat if you put a dead body in a bank vault? Would the bank respect your privacy? Surely there's some line somewhere... edit: apparently HN thinks there is no line anywhere.
- mike-cardwell 15y agoThe problem is, you're missing the point. What they would do if they came across illegal content is irrelevant. They shouldn't be looking at the content in the first place, so this is a non-issue.
- freddyuggs 15y agoIn a new theoretical world where browsers can encrypt and decrypt data securely without the server having any idea of content, and where you can solve all the issues around allowing other people you want to be able to access that data, then sure it's a non-issue. I was talking about reality ;)
- nitrogen 15y agoWe already have encryption that can't be brute forced within the lifetime of the universe.
- rjbond3rd 15y agoYet.
- nitrogen 15y agoYet. Ever. I don't have the original source in front of me, but with enough bits, assuming there isn't some fundamental flaw in the encryption algorithm, you couldn't brute force a key before the heat death of the universe even if you recruited every particle in the visible universe for your computation.
- Avshalom 15y agoFirst: a file being named Child Porn, no really I'm not joking this picture has naked children in it.PNG doesn't make it illegal content. I suspect he also means that they shouldn't be looking through files in the first place on the grounds that "there might be something illegal in them"
- Mavrik 15y agoThats exactly what I meant, I might have just phrased it in a wrong way :/
- wnoise 15y agoThe whole concept of "contraband information" is anathema to a free society.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- terrellm 15y agoWhat if one of your examples was the original filename and the account holder renamed it to something less obvious such as cat.jpg?