Slashdot Mirror
18th Century Law Dredged Up To Force Decryption of Devices
Cognitive Dissident writes The Register has a story about federal prosecutors using a law signed by George Washington to force manufacturers to help law enforcement access encrypted data on devices they manufacture. The All Writs Act is a broad statute simply authorizing courts to issue any order necessary to obtain information within their jurisdiction. Quoting the Register article: "Last month, New York prosecutors successfully persuaded a judge that the ancient law could be used to force an unnamed smartphone manufacturer to help unlock a phone allegedly used in a credit card fraud case. The judge ordered the manufacturer to offer 'reasonable technical assistance' to make the phone's contents available." What will happen when this collides with Apple and Google deliberately creating encryption that they themselves cannot break?
>> authorizing courts to issue any order necessary to obtain information within their jurisdiction.
Isn't this actually contradictory to the 5th admendment?
You have to accept the premise that Apple and Google can not break the encryption, or have not provided a method to break it to the authorities.
The corporate build of Apple OSX that's used by employees has a "corporate key" for filevault.
It's all smoke n mirrors IMO.
Besides what supersedes what? This law or the Constitution?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
"New York prosecutors successfully persuaded a judge that the ancient law could be used" The law was not sunset-ed, the law was not stricken down by another law, the law itself was not repelled on its own, the law was not stricken down by the supreme court. So what is the problem ? Until a repell/strick down , ALL those law are still valid. Cue the shooting down welsh with a bow, but this is the basis of our judiciary process. just because a law is old does not make it invalid.
Correct, until it is repealed (unlikely) or struck down by the Supreme Court it is still the law. This could be a good case to take to the Supreme Court since it highlights the impact of changing technology on the law and could clarify what is required when presented with such a writ.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)
"Is the Constitution Still Relevant?"
http://consortiumnews.com/2013...
Unfortunately, this isn't just a fringe belief: in 2010 a USA Today poll showed that 1 in 4 people no longer though the Constitution was "relevant"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...
And now try to word that in a way that a judge can understand that doesn't make him feel stupid (because judges don't like to feel stupid and will side with the other guy if they do) and doesn't make him think you're trying to bullshit him (which is actually not that far away from the other limitation).
Good luck.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You can't force any level of review. It can always be turned into people signing stuff without looking at it. What the UK is currently doing is getting a buch of lawyers to go through and dig out all the laws that don't do anything any more. Every few years they pass a big omnibus repeal bill removing them. 2013 version can be found at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/...