Smart Phone Encryption

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Fuck 'em. Let 'em get a warrant.

 

[Disgustipated]

You happy?

 

[eyer]

Comey...said he could not understand why companies would “market something expressly to allow people to place themselves beyond the law.”

"beyond the law" meaning the government not having involuntary, open digital access at will to every individual's life...

...Apple and Google are big/powerful enough to hold this individual privacy line themselves right now, but all free market concerns must ban together to bring back American government within the bounds of literal constitutional law.

 

[islandman]

"beyond the law" meaning the government not having involuntary, open digital access at will to every individual's life...

...Apple and Google are big/powerful enough to hold this individual privacy line themselves right now, but all free market concerns must ban together to bring back American government within the bounds of literal constitutional law.

You're confusing the free market with the citizenry as it is the consent of the governed that gives authority to the Constitution. The free market has no vested interest in what you propose unless someone is paying them do to it.

 

[eyer]

You're confusing the free market with the citizenry as it is the consent of the governed that gives authority to the Constitution. The free market has no vested interest in what you propose unless someone is paying them do to it.

And who is paying Apple and Goggle "do to it", de Wannabe?

 

[islandman]

And who is paying Apple and Goggle "do to it", de Wannabe?

Let's not be so naive as to think that Apple and Google are encrypting their OSes because they're being "good, American 'citizens'. They're doing it because we rely on smartphones to manage and protect more and more aspects of our business, personal and financial lives and they are responding to users' demand for better security. Not doing so would be akin to selling a car without door-locks. No one is going to buy a car that can't be locked.

ps - as usual, eyer, you missed the point. You should have thought it through first instead of going for the easy point.

 

[eyer]

Let's...

Stick your irrelevant "Let's"...

...up your irrelevant ass, de Wannabe.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I'm trying to think of a ClearNPresent danger that would require police to eschew getting a warrant.

The Supreme Court unanimously decided this year in Riley V. California that police need a warrant to go snooping.

No moar "accidental" video erasing of police misconduct for them!

 

[islandman]

Stick your irrelevant "Let's"...

...up your irrelevant ass, de Wannabe.

I will and just as soon as I'm done contemplating the amount of brain damage you must suffer from in order to conceive of the notion of corporate America as the vanguard for a return to a constitutional democracy.

http://www.pickinsplinters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/bugs-bunny-maroon.jpg

 

[tactful]

When they start paying the bill, than they can pick it up and listen in.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

ü ñ é ä ç ☝ ☞ ☜ ☟ ° ½ ⅔ ¾ © ℗ ™ € Я я ∴☮☹ ☺

☻ ⚆ ⚇ ⚈ ⚉ ¬ ¿ ▢ ❽ ∞ ☆ ✫ ☭
♨

 

[pete]

I'm trying to think of a ClearNPresent danger that would require police to eschew getting a warrant.

The Supreme Court unanimously decided this year in Riley V. California that police need a warrant to go snooping.

No moar "accidental" video erasing of police misconduct for them!

article seems to allude to the fact that even with a valid warrant, the encryption will prevent LEO's from searching thru phones for evidence of criminal activity.

still ok?

 

[RobDownSouth]

article seems to allude to the fact that even with a valid warrant, the encryption will prevent LEO's from searching thru phones for evidence of criminal activity.

still ok?

A better, if somewhat incomplete, analysis on exactly what and why Apple is encrypting smart phones.

To answer your question, yes, I'm still okay with apple doing that.

Got no trouble with making the cops do some old-fashioned police work, as opposed to gawking at my very special pics of Garnate on my cell phone.

 

[islandman]

♨

You seem to have found a "steaming pile of dog-shit" icon.

Going to start every post with it?

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

You seem to have found a "steaming pile of dog-shit" icon.

Going to start every post with it?

Technically, that icon is known as the Vettesignal

 

[pete]

A better, if somewhat incomplete, analysis on exactly what and why Apple is encrypting smart phones.

To answer your question, yes, I'm still okay with apple doing that.

Got no trouble with making the cops do some old-fashioned police work, as opposed to gawking at my very special pics of Garnate on my cell phone.

i guess i'm in the minority, when it comes to preventing a terrorist attack i'm all favor of helping those who are trying to keep bombs from e'sploding.
maybe it's more acute for me, since i work here in washington dc. i walk by the capital building and the white house all the damn time, and i'd rather not have to endure a crazy afternoon of screaming, running and smoldering ruins some day.

btw, you were supposed to forward me those garnate pics, fucker!

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

i guess i'm in the minority, when it comes to preventing a terrorist attack i'm all favor of helping those who are trying to keep bombs from e'sploding.
maybe it's more acute for me, since i work here in washington dc. i walk by the capital building and the white house all the damn time, and i'd rather not have to endure a crazy afternoon of screaming, running and smoldering ruins some day.

btw, you were supposed to forward me those garnate pics, fucker!

That dog won't hunt, Pete.

That "preventing a terrorist attack" rationale lost its cachet once 24 went off the air.

It's a canard...just my opinion.

And those Garnate pics and videos have fucking DRM on them. Prevents me from sharing them. Without a warrant, of course. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

The warrant has to state what information it seeks. I don't think "complete life history" flies.

Bingo.

 

[pete]

That dog won't hunt, Pete.

That "preventing a terrorist attack" rationale lost its cachet once 24 went off the air.

It's a canard...just my opinion.

i'm sure a lot of smart people thought the same way before 9-11.
and boston.

it's already pretty easy to set off an attack here in the u.s.
why make it even easier?

 

[unregistered]

 

[about_average]

article seems to allude to the fact that even with a valid warrant, the encryption will prevent LEO's from searching thru phones for evidence of criminal activity.

still ok?

Yes. If LEO can crack encryption so can criminals.

 

[MichaelinChina]

which explains why google is blocked here. <shudder>

 

[unregistered]