16 ms·

Homes for Hackers gets a visit from the FBI

137 points by bogrollben 13y ago

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jhuckestein 13y ago
With these kinds of things, I'm always unsure what the proper way to handle them is. A lot of smart people say to under no circumstances talk to law enforcement, ever. I'm sure a lot of you have seen links to that effect on HN. The main argument seems to be that anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. On the other hand, in cases like this, it would seem rude and disproportionate to not even meet these fine fellows from the FBI. A related question I always had is: How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common?
- anon1385 13y ago
  >The main argument seems to be that anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. There are far more reasons than just that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- click170 13y ago
  >> A related question I always had is: How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common? I think if you answered politely and explained why you're unwilling to talk to them about their issue it wouldn't be as easy to misconstrue as suspicious. Something like "I'm sure that you have respectable intent but unfortunately the US government has demonstrated in the recent past that they will prosecute people for things they say when they speak to the authorities. If you have a business card, I would be happy to email you links to several articles detailing these prosecutions further, I hope you understand this is nothing personal." If you just say "no" and abruptly close the door, sure that might look a little bit suspicious. Also, educating them about the issues could help (send them links to media sites, never your own content). Edit: Also, "No, you can't use my bathroom." ;)
  - graeme 13y ago
    That comment could read as suspicious to many people who don't distrust the government. I would check with your lawyer for appropriate boilerplate. IANAL, but I'm guessing that at the business level FBI agents are used to not being able to talk without lawyers.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - protomyth 13y ago
    > I think if you answered politely and explained why you're unwilling to talk to them about their issue it wouldn't be as easy to misconstrue as suspicious. If they are talking to you given the time management the job requires, you are already suspicious. If there is one thing I learned from growing up on a reservation is that the only response to the FBI is "I will not talk unless my lawyer is present and s/he advises me to talk". // if a Federal Marshall wants to talk, you are screwed
    - kefka 13y ago
      What makes a federal marshal "screw-worthy"? Any law enforcement you didn't call seems to all be pretty bad.
      - protomyth 13y ago
        Their talking points are: are you X? if yes, you are under arrest else go to next person. They have a mission not an investigation.
        kefka 13y ago
        I guess I see that more as a feature of a federal marshal. The others will chum up with you and do all sorts of tricks to 'make you talk'. If they do as you say, there's no BS like that. You're either under arrest or you aren't. And, I respect that.
- bcl 13y ago
  It isn't being rude when the power is all on their side. You have no idea what their real motives are or how they will use your conversation. You have no reason to believe anything they tell you. Seems like the safest action is to politely decline.
- pnathan 13y ago
  I think there's a place for education, so that our fine civic defenders know about the technology that runs our lives. Part of the EFF's initial creation impulse involved education of the LEO community. That said, I would be profoundly concerned as well if I got a visit out of the blue from some LEOs without some context.
- eksith 13y ago
  Talk to them if that's all they want to do. Be polite, truthful (without over-sharing) and record the meeting. Often times, I forget to turn off my digital voice recorder after lectures. I find recording and typing notes later to be easier than frantically jotting down notes; also even I can't read my own handwriting. If someone were to bump into me and have a chat, that's on the recording as well. Some time ago, I got a visit from two gentlemen from the FBI. They were very polite and respectful, even though my mom was very scared, they reassured her that this was just an exploratory meeting. They also prefixed my name with "Mr." which was a bit of a delight for me because I was still a teenager back then and used to "hey you". I think I probably still have their cards somewhere. Nothing really happened. They got an anonymous phone call regarding something I may have said in school and wanted to see if there was something to it. Turns out it was a panicked busybody (and this was after 9/11) and they weren't even that clear on what was said. It wasn't anything even remotely requiring a lawyer's presence.
  - Radim 13y ago
    NO! Absolutely appalling advice. And dangerous. Perhaps excusable given your age and your "polite and respectful" experience, but please please be aware that following this advice could end in tragedy.
    - dylangs1030 13y ago
      What would you suggest?
      - adventured 13y ago
        It's very simple. Do not talk to them. Talk to a lawyer.
  - alexholehouse 13y ago
    It wasn't anything even remotely requiring a lawyer's presence. I want to agree with you, but how do you know that (I'm making the assumption here that you're not a lawyer, which may be incorrect)? This seems like the main issue - we (as in the common, non lawyery-types) don't necessarily know what things may or may not be incriminating. I'm not trying to instill a sense of fear, and I would always cooperate with law enforcement to the best of my abilities, but not at the risk of doing or saying something which could subsequently implicate me in something which is technically illegal and could get me arrested, convicted or deported.
- maratd 13y ago
  > anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. No. Anything you say can and will be used against you in court. If you lie about anything, even something trivial, that is a federal offense and you can go to jail for that. And many people have. It has nothing to do with mis-remembering. You have no idea why they're talking to you. It might be about someone else. It might be about you. But you can bet it's about someone or something. And something you say may incriminate either yourself or someone else. > On the other hand, in cases like this, it would seem rude and disproportionate to not even meet these fine fellows from the FBI. This is foolish. They're not there to pop in and say hello. They're doing their job and cooperating with that work is not in your self interest. > How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Rarely. Most people are scared and don't shut up. However, when they do, it's almost always a lawyer and that assumption will work in your favor. > Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common? It doesn't make you suspicious. See the above. Don't be rude or curt. Be kind, they are human after all. Just explain that you are exercising your rights and wish them a good day.
  - dwild 13y ago
    Don't they need to read the miranda right before?
    - jlgaddis 13y ago
      No.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > This is foolish. They're not there to pop in and say hello. They're doing their job and cooperating with that work is not in your self interest. If they are investigating a crime (past or ongoing) that they believe you may have information about which has harmed, is harming, or may in the future harm your community (and, particularly, you specifically!) cooperating in their work may indeed be in your interest, whether you actually have useful information or can let them rule out that you do without raising new suspicions. Of course, you don't know that that's the case when they come and talk to you, and if they are targetting you, its not in your self interest to cooperate. But just as it an error to neglect the possibility that you might be the target, it is an error to neglect the possibility that they might be investigating something that, if there work is not done, will harm you.
hondje 13y ago
By the time they let you know they're investigating you, they've been doing it awhile. This wasn't a friendly getting to know you, you are being investigated for federal crimes. See an attorney now, If/when they come back to arrest you it'll be a surprise.
- dm2 13y ago
  That's not necessarily true. Yes, the FBI probably creates a file on everyone who purchases uranium in the US. FBI agents visit people regularly just to feel out their intentions and add to their file. If they see that you are a small start-up that is interested in energy generation, programming, and enjoys living life without any intentions of harming people, then they will note that in their file and leave you alone. Yes, the FBI has a file on any activist, anyone who visits a country unfriendly to the US, anyone has a written a hateful email/letter to a public official, everyone who has committed a violent crime, anyone who owns a gun, and anyone who has the potential or motive to harm citizens. It's their JOB. It's what the organization was created to do. Lookup how many major terrorist events are prevented by the FBI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Alleged_and_proven_plots http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#... Then they also prevent bank robberies, ID theft, public official corruption, and more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    What's the justification for the activists bit? Surely you didn't mean to say they were created for stuff like COINTELPRO? Also, who above the age of two doesn't have the "potential" to harm citizens?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- alt2319 13y ago
  Absolutely agree. The FBI agent investigating me was quite friendly on his first visit until I said I didn't want to talk to him without an attorney. He didn't even visit me until he'd spent a week talking to other people first, none of which mentioned it to me until much later. He was even less friendly in court. It's no accident that they showed up dressed casually or that one "had" to use the restroom. Entirely planned. These are experienced investigators. The fact that multiple agents showed up is a bad sign. That means they're devoting some significant resources to this investigation. I don't know if I would hire an attorney yet, but it might be time for everyone involved to ask around for recommendations and have some contact info for an attorney on hand in case you needed it.
iblaine 13y ago
Should rename the article to oblivious person picks Travelling Nuker as their business name and unsurprisingly raises suspicious from the government. Where's the news in this?
- jhuckestein 13y ago
  Suspicions of what? Last I checked naming your company wasn't a federal crime
  - teddyh 13y ago
    “Tell it to the jusdge.”
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- JackFranzen 13y ago
  They do software for traveling nuclear power plant employees... I think it's a pretty good name...
lazyjones 13y ago
I take it the bathroom is bugged now (or some nearby room).
VonGuard 13y ago
FBI showed up at Noisebridge this week asking about the Tor node again. They said the Chinese are now using it, but I am sure they have more important worries and reasons to come to NB.
- jhuckestein 13y ago
  After reading that Noisebridge has regular German classes I made a mental note to build my next hardware project there. Somehow, strangely, having the FBI show up there doesn't make me want to hang out there even though I don't have anything to hide (tm). In light of the recent revelations re Prism et al, LEOs, especially federal, make me uncomfortable...
- wiml 13y ago
  I was under the impression that the FBI (or SS or DHS or whoever) showed up at Noisebridge on a regular enough basis that there's a section on their wiki for "if you're the door-answerer, and it's the Feds again, here's the standard procedure".
  - scintill76 13y ago
    Looks like it: https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Noisebridge_Tor/FBI https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Noisebridge_Tor/FBI
vermontdevil 13y ago
Should have told him thanks but no thanks. FBI agents should no longer be considered to be on the side of American citizens. Not with their constant snooping, their attitude that anyone with a computer is a potential hacker etc. I would have made them stay outside of the place, listen to them talk for a min or two and said "thanks for coming and talk later." Then close the door.
northwest 13y ago
> At one point, one of the guys asked to use the bathroom. I showed him where it was and went back outside the house. I remember thinking he had been in there longer than was normal. If you leave cops roaming around your house alone, you may need to consider your hardware compromised. Also, in such a situation, cops would have the opportunity to plant bugs or even "evidence".
ck2 13y ago
Why the hell are people still stupid enough to talk to police without a lawyer present in this country? Anything during that conversation could have been used against them in the future no matter how innocent it actually is. Or if they lied without meaning to, boom, you just lied to a law enforcement officer which is instant crime. Guess what, no matter how friendly you are to them up front, they are still going to come and rip out all your equipment later and return it after years pass when it's all thrown out of court because nothing actually wrong was done.
- switch007 13y ago
  I've noticed a large number of US TV shows (many of which involve the police) constantly feature people instantly and without hesitation assisting the police in their enquiries. I don't want to say it's brainwashing, but it's not far off.
  - Karunamon 13y ago
    And when they do immediately lawyer up, it's because they've been portrayed as the Bad Guy© up to that point.
  - ck2 13y ago
    Yeah TV. Here's the really "entertaining" part about talking to the FBI in reality. Let's say you decide to talk with them. Now that you are talking to them, if they decide during that conversation that you've "become agitated" and pull out their gun and shoot you in their "self defense", guess who investigates them? That's right, the FBI. Guess how many times in the history of the FBI an officer was found to have shot someone inappropriately, even if they weren't armed? That's right, zero times.
    - notahacker 13y ago
      Do you think you're more likely to encourage an FBI officer to decide you are "agitated" if you insist they come back with a warrant and slam the door on them, or politely and cautiously answer basic, non-incriminatory questions on the assumption you're probably not guilty of whatever they're investigating? You can always pull the "if I'm being implicated in a crime, perhaps we should go down the police station and have a recorded conversation with a lawyer present" tack later if the questions start going uncomfortable places.
dm2 13y ago
We should be worried if you have a place called Homes for Hackers with 1Gb fiber and purchased uranium and DIDN'T get a visit or at least an inquiry from the FBI, right? There are a TON of organizations and crazy individuals who are out to harm innocents and cause destruction, it's the FBI's job to prevent that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States Edit: Wtf, so everyone here just prefers anarchy?
- noahc 13y ago
  No. What about 1Gb fiber connection makes one a terrorist? What about buying Uranium off Amazon[1] makes one a terrorist? What about starting an organization that promotes technology in the Midwest, a typically rural and industrial location, in need of new sectors makes one a terrorist? The point is that we need to be more nuanced in our approach and show restraint. There are a lot of people with crazy ideas, however, doing things differently or having eclectic hobbies or dreams isn't what makes someone a terrorist. What do we prefer? We prefer freedom, liberty, and privacy to live our lives according to our own desires. Our desire for real safety is there, but security theater is ineffective. We can not prevent all terrorism, we can not prevent all harm. It is the cost of the freedom, liberty and privacy and one that we should be willing to pay. These are not absolutes, and trade offs can certainly be made. But today, we have traded too much freedom, liberty, and privacy for a false sense of security. This is what we prefer: real safety balanced with real freedom, liberty and privacy. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XXM http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XX...
  - dm2 13y ago
    Nobody said they were terrorists, just that all of those factors combined ranked them higher to have the potential to commit a serious crime. The point of FBI agents contacting people and reaching out is to get a human perspective on their situation, to be able to put in their file things that raw stats cannot show. Yes, purchasing uranium outside of an academic setting is a red flag. How do you propose we achieve "real safety"? > "There are a lot of people with crazy ideas, however, doing things differently or having eclectic hobbies or dreams isn't what makes someone a terrorist." Then what does mark someone as a potential terrorist? Remember you must PREVENT crimes, not just punish people who commit crimes. Nobody was arrested or even felt like they were about to be arrested, it was a friendly and optional meeting to feel out their intentions. There is a huge amount of variables that must be considered to identify someone with the potential to cause harm to society and commit terrorism. Usually that individual keeps quiet and is halfway good about preventing law enforcement from finding out. A face-to-face conversation allows an FBI agent to gauge the situation and hopefully figure out what that individual or organizations true motives are. If they are an energy startup, then fine, no problem, that's was the point of the meeting. Now there are 300+ million more people that the FBI has to make sure doesn't decide to start blowing up citizens, public officials, or organizations.
dimadima 13y ago
Holy fuck whata dumbass. Even if you are Shirley Temple clean you do not ever, ever talk to these people voluntarily. WHAT A FOOL. I am so sad to have read this. These people exist to put you in prison.
alexholehouse 13y ago
Related question: I don't have a lawyer, because, you know, not everyone just has one. If the FBI came to my house to ask questions and I said, "Friends, I'd rather not speak with you without a lawyer present - you know how it is", how do I go about getting said lawyer without going bankrupt?
- belorn 13y ago
  If its Internet freedom related, call the EFF. Either they will help you for free, or help you find a affordable lawyer. The state might also be forced to provide one, but I think that's only if you are being official charged with something.
- Cryptex 13y ago
  I am not a lawyer, but can't you just shut up? The FBI comes by asking questions, you can tell them "I will not answer any questions.", and, depending on the general mood, because not all FBI agents are nice people that will understand what you're doing, you can probably further say "If you have grounds to arrest me, I will want an attorney present for all interactions". As far as I am aware, you do not have to answer them if they question you. This might frustrate the FBI however, and different agents will likely respond in different ways.
  - madaxe 13y ago
    > different agents will likely respond in different ways. That's the worrying thing. One guy might just go "OK", and that's it. Another guy might pistol-whip you, claim you assaulted him, and haul you in for "enhanced interrogation". Stanford prison experiment tells you just about everything you need to know about the mindset of LE.
    - dylangs1030 13y ago
      The Stanford prison experiment was heavily influenced. In a real-life scenario there are always checks, balances and limits to law enforcement, even in corrupt precincts. In the Stanford experiment, there was nothing. It was like Lord of the Flies for adults - an artificial environment where things would escalate unnaturally and unrealistically fast. However, even in precincts with Training Day levels of corruption, people in positions of power know that their excesses and abuses still have to have an upper bound. I'm not attacking you personally on this point, but I studied psychology and have family in law enforcement who have worked in I.A.
shakes 13y ago
> Anyway, I ended up telling them all about the Homes for Hackers program and the KC Startup Village. I hope they understood that I give free rent to entrepreneurs, not black-hat hackers, but one can never be too sure. The fact that there are questions as to whether the FBI understands this distinction is terrifying.
llamataboot 13y ago
Relevant pamphlet - activists and progressive and radical groups have been dealing with this for a while http://ccrjustice.org/ifanagentknocks http://ccrjustice.org/ifanagentknocks
tlrobinson 13y ago
"At one point, one of the guys asked to use the bathroom. I showed him where it was and went back outside the house. I remember thinking he had been in there longer than was normal." Congratulations, you are now the proud owner of an FBI-bugged hacker house.
- dwild 13y ago
  Do they have the right to do that? What would happen if they just found the bugs? Can they keep it? It's in their house...
  - adrianmalacoda 13y ago
    Most likely the FBI would just demand that they return it. http://boingboing.net/2010/10/09/student-finds-gps-bu.html http://boingboing.net/2010/10/09/student-finds-gps-bu.html
mikedemarais 13y ago
i live/work next door to the hacker house. the most worrisome part of this whole visit to me was when i asked them why they were here, their response was "to check in on your grassroots movement" and used the words "counter-culture" twice.
- northwest 13y ago
  This reminds me of how the Occupy movement was handled by the authorities.
- mikedemarais 13y ago
  this being said, our overall conversation was not too out of the ordinary. they asked what my startup did, i gave them the pitch, and then we talked about advanced manufacturing and the future of the american economy for ~20min. none of them smiled though.
trippy_biscuits 13y ago
I'm pretty sure that this published story isn't to advertise the author's own stupidity. I believe it is the only way he can communicate what happened to certain parties without directly contacting said parties. It lets the author elaborate without saying anything.
robomartin 13y ago
I would have said something like this: "My apologies. I understand it would be unwise for me to have a conversation with you without, at the very least, consulting with an attorney. I have no problem talking to you within the correct framework. If there's something relevant to your visit my lawyer and I should consider I ask that you submit it to me in writing in order to avoid any misunderstanding. I appreciate your time. Please let me know if my lawyer and I should contact you and how to go about doing so." A little verbose, I know. Perhaps those with legal training on HN can suggest and help evolve a clear and concise non-threatening statement one could commit to memory for such illustrious occasions? It sure sounds like the tech world is intersecting with law enforcement with greater frequency these days. It would behoove any entrepreneur and their staff to fully understand how to deal with these events in a manner that does not generate additional risk or liability for anyone.
jlgaddis 13y ago
> ... apparently the agents didn't know it even existed and asked me all about it. I saw this same sort of thing from FBI agents ~17 years ago... feigning ignorance and asking all sorts of questions. I realized soon after that it was all a ploy. They almost certainly knew more about the subject than I did.
rdl 13y ago
There actually are good/safe ways to have LEO contacts, which can be helpful later. The time to do that is before they contact you in the context of an investigation -- helping your local PD learn about technology issues in general (both on the criminal side and on the public safety side -- things like communications in an emergency or how to help people report property crimes online).

137 points by bogrollben 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

With these kinds of things, I'm always unsure what the proper way to handle them is. A lot of smart people say to under no circumstances talk to law enforcement, ever. I'm sure a lot of you have seen links to that effect on HN. The main argument seems to be that anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. On the other hand, in cases like this, it would seem rude and disproportionate to not even meet these fine fellows from the FBI. A related question I always had is: How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common?

anon1385 13y ago
>The main argument seems to be that anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. There are far more reasons than just that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
click170 13y ago
>> A related question I always had is: How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common? I think if you answered politely and explained why you're unwilling to talk to them about their issue it wouldn't be as easy to misconstrue as suspicious. Something like "I'm sure that you have respectable intent but unfortunately the US government has demonstrated in the recent past that they will prosecute people for things they say when they speak to the authorities. If you have a business card, I would be happy to email you links to several articles detailing these prosecutions further, I hope you understand this is nothing personal." If you just say "no" and abruptly close the door, sure that might look a little bit suspicious. Also, educating them about the issues could help (send them links to media sites, never your own content). Edit: Also, "No, you can't use my bathroom." ;)
- graeme 13y ago
  That comment could read as suspicious to many people who don't distrust the government. I would check with your lawyer for appropriate boilerplate. IANAL, but I'm guessing that at the business level FBI agents are used to not being able to talk without lawyers.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- protomyth 13y ago
  > I think if you answered politely and explained why you're unwilling to talk to them about their issue it wouldn't be as easy to misconstrue as suspicious. If they are talking to you given the time management the job requires, you are already suspicious. If there is one thing I learned from growing up on a reservation is that the only response to the FBI is "I will not talk unless my lawyer is present and s/he advises me to talk". // if a Federal Marshall wants to talk, you are screwed
  - kefka 13y ago
    What makes a federal marshal "screw-worthy"? Any law enforcement you didn't call seems to all be pretty bad.
    - protomyth 13y ago
      Their talking points are: are you X? if yes, you are under arrest else go to next person. They have a mission not an investigation.
      - kefka 13y ago
        I guess I see that more as a feature of a federal marshal. The others will chum up with you and do all sorts of tricks to 'make you talk'. If they do as you say, there's no BS like that. You're either under arrest or you aren't. And, I respect that.
bcl 13y ago
It isn't being rude when the power is all on their side. You have no idea what their real motives are or how they will use your conversation. You have no reason to believe anything they tell you. Seems like the safest action is to politely decline.
pnathan 13y ago
I think there's a place for education, so that our fine civic defenders know about the technology that runs our lives. Part of the EFF's initial creation impulse involved education of the LEO community. That said, I would be profoundly concerned as well if I got a visit out of the blue from some LEOs without some context.
eksith 13y ago
Talk to them if that's all they want to do. Be polite, truthful (without over-sharing) and record the meeting. Often times, I forget to turn off my digital voice recorder after lectures. I find recording and typing notes later to be easier than frantically jotting down notes; also even I can't read my own handwriting. If someone were to bump into me and have a chat, that's on the recording as well. Some time ago, I got a visit from two gentlemen from the FBI. They were very polite and respectful, even though my mom was very scared, they reassured her that this was just an exploratory meeting. They also prefixed my name with "Mr." which was a bit of a delight for me because I was still a teenager back then and used to "hey you". I think I probably still have their cards somewhere. Nothing really happened. They got an anonymous phone call regarding something I may have said in school and wanted to see if there was something to it. Turns out it was a panicked busybody (and this was after 9/11) and they weren't even that clear on what was said. It wasn't anything even remotely requiring a lawyer's presence.
- Radim 13y ago
  NO! Absolutely appalling advice. And dangerous. Perhaps excusable given your age and your "polite and respectful" experience, but please please be aware that following this advice could end in tragedy.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    What would you suggest?
    - adventured 13y ago
      It's very simple. Do not talk to them. Talk to a lawyer.
- alexholehouse 13y ago
  It wasn't anything even remotely requiring a lawyer's presence. I want to agree with you, but how do you know that (I'm making the assumption here that you're not a lawyer, which may be incorrect)? This seems like the main issue - we (as in the common, non lawyery-types) don't necessarily know what things may or may not be incriminating. I'm not trying to instill a sense of fear, and I would always cooperate with law enforcement to the best of my abilities, but not at the risk of doing or saying something which could subsequently implicate me in something which is technically illegal and could get me arrested, convicted or deported.
maratd 13y ago
> anything you say to an officer of the law might be misremembered later and there is nothing you can do against that. No. Anything you say can and will be used against you in court. If you lie about anything, even something trivial, that is a federal offense and you can go to jail for that. And many people have. It has nothing to do with mis-remembering. You have no idea why they're talking to you. It might be about someone else. It might be about you. But you can bet it's about someone or something. And something you say may incriminate either yourself or someone else. > On the other hand, in cases like this, it would seem rude and disproportionate to not even meet these fine fellows from the FBI. This is foolish. They're not there to pop in and say hello. They're doing their job and cooperating with that work is not in your self interest. > How often is law enforcement confronted with people that don't talk to them on general principle? Rarely. Most people are scared and don't shut up. However, when they do, it's almost always a lawyer and that assumption will work in your favor. > Does that really make you suspicious or is it quite common? It doesn't make you suspicious. See the above. Don't be rude or curt. Be kind, they are human after all. Just explain that you are exercising your rights and wish them a good day.
- dwild 13y ago
  Don't they need to read the miranda right before?
  - jlgaddis 13y ago
    No.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > This is foolish. They're not there to pop in and say hello. They're doing their job and cooperating with that work is not in your self interest. If they are investigating a crime (past or ongoing) that they believe you may have information about which has harmed, is harming, or may in the future harm your community (and, particularly, you specifically!) cooperating in their work may indeed be in your interest, whether you actually have useful information or can let them rule out that you do without raising new suspicions. Of course, you don't know that that's the case when they come and talk to you, and if they are targetting you, its not in your self interest to cooperate. But just as it an error to neglect the possibility that you might be the target, it is an error to neglect the possibility that they might be investigating something that, if there work is not done, will harm you.

hondje 13y ago

By the time they let you know they're investigating you, they've been doing it awhile. This wasn't a friendly getting to know you, you are being investigated for federal crimes. See an attorney now, If/when they come back to arrest you it'll be a surprise.

dm2 13y ago
That's not necessarily true. Yes, the FBI probably creates a file on everyone who purchases uranium in the US. FBI agents visit people regularly just to feel out their intentions and add to their file. If they see that you are a small start-up that is interested in energy generation, programming, and enjoys living life without any intentions of harming people, then they will note that in their file and leave you alone. Yes, the FBI has a file on any activist, anyone who visits a country unfriendly to the US, anyone has a written a hateful email/letter to a public official, everyone who has committed a violent crime, anyone who owns a gun, and anyone who has the potential or motive to harm citizens. It's their JOB. It's what the organization was created to do. Lookup how many major terrorist events are prevented by the FBI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Alleged_and_proven_plots http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#... Then they also prevent bank robberies, ID theft, public official corruption, and more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  What's the justification for the activists bit? Surely you didn't mean to say they were created for stuff like COINTELPRO? Also, who above the age of two doesn't have the "potential" to harm citizens?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
alt2319 13y ago
Absolutely agree. The FBI agent investigating me was quite friendly on his first visit until I said I didn't want to talk to him without an attorney. He didn't even visit me until he'd spent a week talking to other people first, none of which mentioned it to me until much later. He was even less friendly in court. It's no accident that they showed up dressed casually or that one "had" to use the restroom. Entirely planned. These are experienced investigators. The fact that multiple agents showed up is a bad sign. That means they're devoting some significant resources to this investigation. I don't know if I would hire an attorney yet, but it might be time for everyone involved to ask around for recommendations and have some contact info for an attorney on hand in case you needed it.

iblaine 13y ago

Should rename the article to oblivious person picks Travelling Nuker as their business name and unsurprisingly raises suspicious from the government. Where's the news in this?

jhuckestein 13y ago
Suspicions of what? Last I checked naming your company wasn't a federal crime
- teddyh 13y ago
  “Tell it to the jusdge.”
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
JackFranzen 13y ago
They do software for traveling nuclear power plant employees... I think it's a pretty good name...

lazyjones 13y ago

I take it the bathroom is bugged now (or some nearby room).

VonGuard 13y ago

FBI showed up at Noisebridge this week asking about the Tor node again. They said the Chinese are now using it, but I am sure they have more important worries and reasons to come to NB.

jhuckestein 13y ago
After reading that Noisebridge has regular German classes I made a mental note to build my next hardware project there. Somehow, strangely, having the FBI show up there doesn't make me want to hang out there even though I don't have anything to hide (tm). In light of the recent revelations re Prism et al, LEOs, especially federal, make me uncomfortable...
wiml 13y ago
I was under the impression that the FBI (or SS or DHS or whoever) showed up at Noisebridge on a regular enough basis that there's a section on their wiki for "if you're the door-answerer, and it's the Feds again, here's the standard procedure".
- scintill76 13y ago
  Looks like it: https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Noisebridge_Tor/FBI https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Noisebridge_Tor/FBI

vermontdevil 13y ago

Should have told him thanks but no thanks. FBI agents should no longer be considered to be on the side of American citizens. Not with their constant snooping, their attitude that anyone with a computer is a potential hacker etc. I would have made them stay outside of the place, listen to them talk for a min or two and said "thanks for coming and talk later." Then close the door.

northwest 13y ago

> At one point, one of the guys asked to use the bathroom. I showed him where it was and went back outside the house. I remember thinking he had been in there longer than was normal. If you leave cops roaming around your house alone, you may need to consider your hardware compromised. Also, in such a situation, cops would have the opportunity to plant bugs or even "evidence".

ck2 13y ago

Why the hell are people still stupid enough to talk to police without a lawyer present in this country? Anything during that conversation could have been used against them in the future no matter how innocent it actually is. Or if they lied without meaning to, boom, you just lied to a law enforcement officer which is instant crime. Guess what, no matter how friendly you are to them up front, they are still going to come and rip out all your equipment later and return it after years pass when it's all thrown out of court because nothing actually wrong was done.

switch007 13y ago
I've noticed a large number of US TV shows (many of which involve the police) constantly feature people instantly and without hesitation assisting the police in their enquiries. I don't want to say it's brainwashing, but it's not far off.
- Karunamon 13y ago
  And when they do immediately lawyer up, it's because they've been portrayed as the Bad Guy© up to that point.
- ck2 13y ago
  Yeah TV. Here's the really "entertaining" part about talking to the FBI in reality. Let's say you decide to talk with them. Now that you are talking to them, if they decide during that conversation that you've "become agitated" and pull out their gun and shoot you in their "self defense", guess who investigates them? That's right, the FBI. Guess how many times in the history of the FBI an officer was found to have shot someone inappropriately, even if they weren't armed? That's right, zero times.
  - notahacker 13y ago
    Do you think you're more likely to encourage an FBI officer to decide you are "agitated" if you insist they come back with a warrant and slam the door on them, or politely and cautiously answer basic, non-incriminatory questions on the assumption you're probably not guilty of whatever they're investigating? You can always pull the "if I'm being implicated in a crime, perhaps we should go down the police station and have a recorded conversation with a lawyer present" tack later if the questions start going uncomfortable places.

dm2 13y ago

We should be worried if you have a place called Homes for Hackers with 1Gb fiber and purchased uranium and DIDN'T get a visit or at least an inquiry from the FBI, right? There are a TON of organizations and crazy individuals who are out to harm innocents and cause destruction, it's the FBI's job to prevent that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States Edit: Wtf, so everyone here just prefers anarchy?

noahc 13y ago
No. What about 1Gb fiber connection makes one a terrorist? What about buying Uranium off Amazon[1] makes one a terrorist? What about starting an organization that promotes technology in the Midwest, a typically rural and industrial location, in need of new sectors makes one a terrorist? The point is that we need to be more nuanced in our approach and show restraint. There are a lot of people with crazy ideas, however, doing things differently or having eclectic hobbies or dreams isn't what makes someone a terrorist. What do we prefer? We prefer freedom, liberty, and privacy to live our lives according to our own desires. Our desire for real safety is there, but security theater is ineffective. We can not prevent all terrorism, we can not prevent all harm. It is the cost of the freedom, liberty and privacy and one that we should be willing to pay. These are not absolutes, and trade offs can certainly be made. But today, we have traded too much freedom, liberty, and privacy for a false sense of security. This is what we prefer: real safety balanced with real freedom, liberty and privacy. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XXM http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XX...
- dm2 13y ago
  Nobody said they were terrorists, just that all of those factors combined ranked them higher to have the potential to commit a serious crime. The point of FBI agents contacting people and reaching out is to get a human perspective on their situation, to be able to put in their file things that raw stats cannot show. Yes, purchasing uranium outside of an academic setting is a red flag. How do you propose we achieve "real safety"? > "There are a lot of people with crazy ideas, however, doing things differently or having eclectic hobbies or dreams isn't what makes someone a terrorist." Then what does mark someone as a potential terrorist? Remember you must PREVENT crimes, not just punish people who commit crimes. Nobody was arrested or even felt like they were about to be arrested, it was a friendly and optional meeting to feel out their intentions. There is a huge amount of variables that must be considered to identify someone with the potential to cause harm to society and commit terrorism. Usually that individual keeps quiet and is halfway good about preventing law enforcement from finding out. A face-to-face conversation allows an FBI agent to gauge the situation and hopefully figure out what that individual or organizations true motives are. If they are an energy startup, then fine, no problem, that's was the point of the meeting. Now there are 300+ million more people that the FBI has to make sure doesn't decide to start blowing up citizens, public officials, or organizations.

dimadima 13y ago

Holy fuck whata dumbass. Even if you are Shirley Temple clean you do not ever, ever talk to these people voluntarily. WHAT A FOOL. I am so sad to have read this. These people exist to put you in prison.

alexholehouse 13y ago

Related question: I don't have a lawyer, because, you know, not everyone just has one. If the FBI came to my house to ask questions and I said, "Friends, I'd rather not speak with you without a lawyer present - you know how it is", how do I go about getting said lawyer without going bankrupt?

belorn 13y ago
If its Internet freedom related, call the EFF. Either they will help you for free, or help you find a affordable lawyer. The state might also be forced to provide one, but I think that's only if you are being official charged with something.
Cryptex 13y ago
I am not a lawyer, but can't you just shut up? The FBI comes by asking questions, you can tell them "I will not answer any questions.", and, depending on the general mood, because not all FBI agents are nice people that will understand what you're doing, you can probably further say "If you have grounds to arrest me, I will want an attorney present for all interactions". As far as I am aware, you do not have to answer them if they question you. This might frustrate the FBI however, and different agents will likely respond in different ways.
- madaxe 13y ago
  > different agents will likely respond in different ways. That's the worrying thing. One guy might just go "OK", and that's it. Another guy might pistol-whip you, claim you assaulted him, and haul you in for "enhanced interrogation". Stanford prison experiment tells you just about everything you need to know about the mindset of LE.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    The Stanford prison experiment was heavily influenced. In a real-life scenario there are always checks, balances and limits to law enforcement, even in corrupt precincts. In the Stanford experiment, there was nothing. It was like Lord of the Flies for adults - an artificial environment where things would escalate unnaturally and unrealistically fast. However, even in precincts with Training Day levels of corruption, people in positions of power know that their excesses and abuses still have to have an upper bound. I'm not attacking you personally on this point, but I studied psychology and have family in law enforcement who have worked in I.A.

shakes 13y ago

> Anyway, I ended up telling them all about the Homes for Hackers program and the KC Startup Village. I hope they understood that I give free rent to entrepreneurs, not black-hat hackers, but one can never be too sure. The fact that there are questions as to whether the FBI understands this distinction is terrifying.

llamataboot 13y ago

Relevant pamphlet - activists and progressive and radical groups have been dealing with this for a while http://ccrjustice.org/ifanagentknocks http://ccrjustice.org/ifanagentknocks

tlrobinson 13y ago

"At one point, one of the guys asked to use the bathroom. I showed him where it was and went back outside the house. I remember thinking he had been in there longer than was normal." Congratulations, you are now the proud owner of an FBI-bugged hacker house.

dwild 13y ago
Do they have the right to do that? What would happen if they just found the bugs? Can they keep it? It's in their house...
- adrianmalacoda 13y ago
  Most likely the FBI would just demand that they return it. http://boingboing.net/2010/10/09/student-finds-gps-bu.html http://boingboing.net/2010/10/09/student-finds-gps-bu.html

mikedemarais 13y ago

i live/work next door to the hacker house. the most worrisome part of this whole visit to me was when i asked them why they were here, their response was "to check in on your grassroots movement" and used the words "counter-culture" twice.

northwest 13y ago
This reminds me of how the Occupy movement was handled by the authorities.
mikedemarais 13y ago
this being said, our overall conversation was not too out of the ordinary. they asked what my startup did, i gave them the pitch, and then we talked about advanced manufacturing and the future of the american economy for ~20min. none of them smiled though.

trippy_biscuits 13y ago

I'm pretty sure that this published story isn't to advertise the author's own stupidity. I believe it is the only way he can communicate what happened to certain parties without directly contacting said parties. It lets the author elaborate without saying anything.

robomartin 13y ago

I would have said something like this: "My apologies. I understand it would be unwise for me to have a conversation with you without, at the very least, consulting with an attorney. I have no problem talking to you within the correct framework. If there's something relevant to your visit my lawyer and I should consider I ask that you submit it to me in writing in order to avoid any misunderstanding. I appreciate your time. Please let me know if my lawyer and I should contact you and how to go about doing so." A little verbose, I know. Perhaps those with legal training on HN can suggest and help evolve a clear and concise non-threatening statement one could commit to memory for such illustrious occasions? It sure sounds like the tech world is intersecting with law enforcement with greater frequency these days. It would behoove any entrepreneur and their staff to fully understand how to deal with these events in a manner that does not generate additional risk or liability for anyone.

jlgaddis 13y ago

> ... apparently the agents didn't know it even existed and asked me all about it. I saw this same sort of thing from FBI agents ~17 years ago... feigning ignorance and asking all sorts of questions. I realized soon after that it was all a ploy. They almost certainly knew more about the subject than I did.

rdl 13y ago

There actually are good/safe ways to have LEO contacts, which can be helpful later. The time to do that is before they contact you in the context of an investigation -- helping your local PD learn about technology issues in general (both on the criminal side and on the public safety side -- things like communications in an emergency or how to help people report property crimes online).