4 ms·
Ah, let's see: Here in the US we have a Constitution. Now I remember, once I downloaded a copy. Right, here it is. Hmm .... Okay, how about this part: Amen
by graycat 12y ago
Ah, let's see: Here in the US we have a
Constitution. Now I remember, once
I downloaded a copy. Right, here it is.
Hmm .... Okay, how about this part:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Note: I added the emphasis. Maybe I'd wish
the emphasis would be letters 10 feet high
with two pounds of black ink each, but I'm
not seeing a way to do that on HN.
Seems pretty clear to me.
Now when I lived near DC, as I recall, the
FBI HQ was not far from the National Archives
with the original copy and also not far from
the Supreme Court where, maybe, the FBI could
get some eighth grade civics tutoring on
what that part of the Constitution means.
To me, what the part means is, in simple terms,
keep your filthy, sticky hands the F off my
stuff. That is, unless you have one of
those warrant thingies. And I don't even own a mobile device.
I sound pissed off? Right: A lot of really
good people fought and died to give us the
freedom to write and adopt that Constitution.
To track mud all over it now is, in a word,
a bummer, and that's putting it very mildly.
The FBI needs to return and repeat eighth
grade civics.
I know; I know; apparently some people in the
FBI would say that
the Constitution was written
long ago, and now the FBI has much, much, much
more important things to worry about than
those old fuddy duddies who wrote that old
piece of paper and, besides, they didn't
have smart phones then. Some people might
say such things, but I don't go along, and
we do have a way to get an answer -- that's
just what the SCOTUS is there for, in this
case for a reading comprehension lesson
in eighth grade civics.
That text I
emphasized above is difficult to read and understand?
Ah, now I get it, for some in the FBI, easy to
read and understand but difficult to accept and
easy to violate.
- res0nat0r 12y agoThis gets repeated incorrectly every time this issue comes up, but data you hand over to third parties isn't black and white and is subject to access from other entities.
- waterlesscloud 12y agoIf information resides entirely on a phone which I own, which third party am I handing it over to? Am I handing over information to Moleskine when I write in a notebook I purchased?
- res0nat0r 12y agoYour information passing thru Apple servers can be subpoenaed by law enforcement when they have a warrant signed by a judge. This isn't new news to you or I.
- waterlesscloud 12y agoYes, but that's not the issue being discussed here. This is specifically about information that exists only on the phone itself.
- res0nat0r 12y agoI understand where the pics are coming from when they have a signed warrant from a judge demonstrating probable cause, so I understand can can feel for both sides of the argument. It isn't a simple issue.
- tobylane 12y agoIf (and I'm not sure photos are included) Apple is telling the truth, the data was secured in transit with their usual SSL, and was encrypted on the user's computer first, then is the data really on Apples' servers at all? They have an encrypted blob with no key, saying they have a copy of it isn't accurate. If it was a real safe then a) Apple can't prove that the blob doesn't hold a document that a warrant is for, but equally law enforcement can't prove it is there. Unfortunately they can just ask for the whole thing. b) Chain of custody can't be shown by Apple, all they did is take the locked safe from you. I could send a document to the printer and ask you to take it to my boss, what if they received a resignation letter not a weekly report?
- 12y ago
- trhway 12y ago>no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. with encryption such Warrant becomes impossibility while their unquestionable loyalty to Constitution would protect your unencrypted data from Warrant-less access. Such position would play very well in public mind, and i kind of pessimistic here in the sense that i expect that compromise with escrow master-keys would probably be struck here, a compromise that we'll learn about only very long time after it happens.