Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Made Secret Arguments To Break Crypto, Now ACLU Wants To Make Them Public (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Earlier this year, a federal judge in Fresno, California, denied prosecutors' efforts to compel Facebook to help it wiretap Messenger voice calls. But the precise legal arguments that the government made, and that the judge ultimately rejected, are still sealed. On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union formally asked the judge to unseal court dockets and related rulings associated with this ongoing case involving alleged MS-13 gang members. ACLU lawyers argue that such a little-charted area of the law must be made public so that tech companies and the public can fully know what's going on.
In their new filing, ACLU lawyers pointed out that "neither the government's legal arguments nor the judge's legal basis for rejecting the government motion has ever been made public." The attorneys continued, citing a "strong public interest in knowing which law has been interpreted" and referencing an op-ed published on Ars on October 2 as an example. The ACLU argued that the case is reminiscent of the so-called "FBI v. Apple" legal showdown -- whose docket and related filings were public -- where the government made novel arguments in an attempt to crack the encryption on a seized iPhone. Those legal questions were never resolved, as the government said the day before a scheduled hearing that it had found a company to assist in its efforts. "Moreover, the sealing of the docket sheet in this case impermissibly prevents the public from knowing anything about the actions of both the judiciary and the executive in navigating a novel legal issue, which has the potential to reoccur in the future," the ACLU's attorneys continued.
"The case involves the executive branch's attempt to force a private corporation to break the encryption and other security mechanisms on a product relied upon by the public to have private conversations. The government is not just seeking information held by a third party; rather, it appears to be attempting to get this Court to force a communications platform to redesign its product to thwart efforts to secure communications between users."
In their new filing, ACLU lawyers pointed out that "neither the government's legal arguments nor the judge's legal basis for rejecting the government motion has ever been made public." The attorneys continued, citing a "strong public interest in knowing which law has been interpreted" and referencing an op-ed published on Ars on October 2 as an example. The ACLU argued that the case is reminiscent of the so-called "FBI v. Apple" legal showdown -- whose docket and related filings were public -- where the government made novel arguments in an attempt to crack the encryption on a seized iPhone. Those legal questions were never resolved, as the government said the day before a scheduled hearing that it had found a company to assist in its efforts. "Moreover, the sealing of the docket sheet in this case impermissibly prevents the public from knowing anything about the actions of both the judiciary and the executive in navigating a novel legal issue, which has the potential to reoccur in the future," the ACLU's attorneys continued.
"The case involves the executive branch's attempt to force a private corporation to break the encryption and other security mechanisms on a product relied upon by the public to have private conversations. The government is not just seeking information held by a third party; rather, it appears to be attempting to get this Court to force a communications platform to redesign its product to thwart efforts to secure communications between users."
In what world is this remotely a good idea? All citizens should see red flags when their government tries this sort of thing.
A clear indication that they do not value the very fabric that underpins society which they're charged to serve.
This is the kind of activity that makes you realize they'll exploit and bend any circumstance that fits their scheme.
And we totally promise we won't hold back or redact anything. Promise. Really. Pinky swear. You can trust us; we're from the government.
aka the ccc. an act to be acted upon? we vast majority unchosens concur? never a better time to bury (the hatchet(s), greed, fear & ego etc..) of) the self installed inbred crown royal biotronic megapsychos, & the genocidal corepirate nazi (ver.4th.wrong.again) shysterious shylokian wmd on credit media hypenosys perfect balancers? many thank yous.. better days ahead..
next; live satellite feed from any location?
we've paid for all that gizmositry? shouldn't we be able to at least watch anywhere on the planet live, close up, within seconds? citizen managed era of open honest communications & commerce expansion? can you see me? that's me waving & tapping on the screen.. well yes the roof needs a little work.. (go from chatting to blatting in seconds)... ordering 2 of those solar molars (youtooth enabled) to power my retinal displays without visible wires.. see you soon enough? geneva convention prohibits gassing civilians? some still calling this 'weather'?
on the board; the beggars have breached the gates, the fairytail interlusion of 200 or more so-called civilizations.. rehatched every now & again now? every time the moon is lit from more than 1 direction?
Those who would give up essential Safety, to purchase a little temporary Liberty, deserve neither Safety nor Liberty
Fenjamin Branklin
That way all the legal wrangling in the world means nada, and you can just tell the government to go piss up a rope.
This kind of nonsense has been going on since Diffie and Helman found a way to secure our freedom to communicate in private electronically and be Phil Zimmerman gave us Pretty Good Privacy. They will never stop being blatant criminals posing as good guys, as they hope in perpetuity that we will someday be willing to sacrifice freedom for the mere illusion of security. Congress should pass a law making any such attempt a felony, lest they someday succeed.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
It would be best to assume all electronic / digital communication channels to be compromised already and adjust your means of communication accordingly if you need to discuss anything sensitive.
They will never quit until they get their way. Legally or in secret.
Let's not dumb ourselves down to the level of Engadget, Ars, etc
The majority of voters will not support a setup where law enforcement is locked out of communications apps because civil libertarians are concerned that we might enter into a dystopian Hell if valid warrants can be enforced good and hard on both communication providers and individuals. If you don't want the FBI to grow tremendously in power to coerce individuals into compliance, there needs to be some moderation wherein Facebook and others accept the fact that a valid warrant should prima facie trump privacy rights every day of the week.
MS-13 is a huge gang and their activities are so evil that it was rumored that the US deporting thousands of them back to El Salvador was considered a national security crisis in that country. To put it mildly, the average person would rather have an agent of Hezbollah and mob boss living on both sides of them than have MS-13 active in their community.
If the public has to choose between effective elimination of such groups and their rights, even Ben Franklin would be hard-pressed to not defer to executive power to keep society safe from them. That's a terrible recipe for making this the hill that our rights die on.
Are your arguments do harebrained and idiotic that you're afraid you get laughed out the court when the judge gets to hear what a sane person has to say about them?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The gov't brought irrefutable evidence to the judge that the good of the public, its safety and national security would be irreparably harmed if Facebook Messenger were day lighted, exposing MS-13 and all existing surveillance lost on a very dangerous gang.
It would send MS-13 underground where the USgov't would need to start all surveillance over again.
Look at civil forfeiture, too.
This is what governments do.
Why do people act surprised that, given power, governments use that power against their own population?
You CAN'T ask a government to "solve your problems" and unless you want that government to suppress you.
This is Obama's DOJ. So before you start screaming about Trump, you should think about that. There really is no difference, except Obama is slick, and Trump is crude. The end result is the same policy. Under Hillary the result would have been the same as well.
You CAN'T ask a government to "solve your problems" and unless you want that government to suppress you.
That's precisely the role of government, though: solve your problems. There are many problems that are impracticable or inefficient for individuals to solve, so government steps in. The government is also expected to solve these problems in ways that benefit the whole. In some cases those solutions may be suboptimal for some individuals, but those individuals still benefit indirectly as society as a whole benefits. The issues arise when government abdicates its duty to the whole and enacts solutions that benefit an individual(s). That's where you get oppression, suppression, cronyism, corruption, despotism, autocratism, and good ol' fashioned modern American politics.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
They went from being a good idea, to a nuisance, to a true brute squad. I am suspicious merely because it is them making the request. These days they exist to obfuscate and create discord, and that's pretty much it. The last things on earth that the ACLU care about are the rights and freedoms of others.
I like the ACLU but when I gave them money I got so much junk mail from them asking for more it pissed me off. I still get mail from them ten years later. All my donation has been spent sending me junk mail.
This is Slashdot, if you don't know the difference, we don't much care about your limited knowledge.
You'd have to be lobotomized like the rest of them. ;-)
Look, 'crypto' has been widely and unambiguously used to describe cryptography for 20+ years, we're not changing to account for a bunch of people who think their understanding of the word is the only meaning.
Just like nobody ever gave a shit about saying 'cracker' to differentiate from 'hacker', when the original use of 'hacker' encompassed both activities.
The directors of the ACLU need to be locked up. They are trators to america who put rights of violent foriners above safety and security of the real americans.
Yes of course, because we all know those in government would never abuse their surveillance powers to spy on political opponents, congresscritters, and journalists.
Oh, wait....
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
OH FUCK NO! Crypto is a prefix, but if it has to be a short form for something it should be for cryptography and not cryptocurrency. The buttcoin bros can get fucked.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
No its not. The government is there to peacefully resolve disputes between individual parties. Parties that believe there truth is true, and that their natural rights are being abridged.
Look at civil forfeiture, too.
Yeah, look at it!
I think it's been clear to a majority of us that it's absolutely an illegal abuse of power. Unfortunately, it takes time for things to work their way through the courts. Looks like civil forfeiture is going to get significantly neutered in the very near future. That's going to result in a lot of clawback from police departments, I'd be guessing. Going to keep the lawyers busy for years.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
That's bullshit. Consider the problems of how to get a car across a river, or a letter across the country. In both cases government solves this problem just fine. Without government people with money would run roughshod over everyone else with no checks and balances. Our government is not perfect, but I sure in hell wouldn't want to do without it completely.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
So how did the government precisely solve my problems by invading Iraq? The decision was taken by the smartest people, the best the US government could produce. They did endless studies and conferences.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
The issues arise when government abdicates its duty to the whole
The issue is that people allow/encourage it to happen, because they too see a potential personal benefit for themselves. The government is a reflection. The power to change it is ours alone. There is no one else to blame for the chronic problems we create and sustain.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
So how did the government precisely solve my problems by invading Iraq?
I believe Iraq falls under the sections of "cronyism", "corruption", and "good ol' fashioned modern American politics". Iraq was about oil, defense contracts, and Bush wanting to finish what his dad started in 91.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Oh no, it wasn't a Republican thing. Not at all. Here's Madeline Albright falsely claiming Saddam had WMD and calling for invasion in 1998. Under Democrat Bill Clinton.
PNAC urges war in 1996
"That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor."
So don't go trying to blame this on Republicans. It certainly has nothing to do with good ol' fashioned modern American politics because Americans want nothing to do with foreign affairs. Our lives are falling apart and we badly need attention to our own affairs. Literally nobody except the oh-so-wise US government was in favor of invading Iraq. Any process that produces such an obviously invalid result is suspect in all of its other choices, as well.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
It certainly has nothing to do with good ol' fashioned modern American politics because Americans want nothing to do with foreign affairs.
That's the thing about good ol' fashioned modern American politics. It doesn't care about what Americans want. It only cares about what the political and financial elite want. Americans don't matter in American politics anymore except as a means to get either yourself or your puppet elected/reelected
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
If your LAW COURTS operate in secret you do not have a free society. Sorry to burst your freedumb bubble chaps..
Think white collar crook and politician, rich guy conspiring and getting away with it THAT has far worst ramification than the potential loss of privacy.
Ronnie destroyed America for his corporate masters. Y'all just soooo poors its finally caught up to you.. the real important Americans became Swiss citizens in the 80s brah...
I know you loooove to hate voting but keep on shitting on that meaningful right and you'll end up in somewhere like East Germany and your descendants may never even get to vote.
Jesus Christ are you ever a fucking puddle of stupidity.
Plenty of freedom here to your north, faggot!
You ARE in East Germany.
A little known fact is that some communist regimes in East Europe started to offer fake choices between two candidates. Yes, you had the choice! Vote for the commie. Or the other commie.
And whether you like it or not, you have exactly the same choice in the US. Vote for the corporate whore. Or the other corporate whore.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I disagree that the primary role of government is to solve all of our problems. They are pretty good at national security. Beyond that they pretty much suck at everything else. The other thing is that they almost never act for the benefit of the whole. Corporations, those with money and power always come first over the common man.
Became Swiss?
I wanna hear this conspiracy theory. Lay it out for me - who did what to whom and why has it been hidden from everyone but you?
So good old Soviet socialism is the answer, comrade?
"The issue is that people allow/encourage it to happen"
The billionaires do. The rest of us can't afford any buy-in.
No, no, no you see, they didn't become Swiss, they merely used positive visualization and forged Rhodesian papers.
Are you talking about nukes or pressure cookers? Because the term has evolved over time and gotten more and more diluted.
Saddam Hussein most certainly had and used chemical weapons against his own Kurds and Iran. Mustard gas, cyanide, tabun, sarin and VX nerve agents. In 1988. The man was a monster, but we looked the other way because he was attacking Iran. After the 2003 invasion, they found left-over canisters of Sarin buried out in the desert, but we knew about those and knew that they were expired and unusable. It doesn't have a shelf life of 20 years. Saddam has no viable chemicals weapons at the time we invaded. Bush sold that war on a lie and purposely made people afraid that Saddam had access to nukes. We unleashed partisan violence that Saddam was restraining and we got ~300,000 civilians killed. And about 3,000 of our own troops killed. But hey, Saddam much more directly killed about 250,000 civilians. So at least we got rid of him, right? Thank god that power vacuum didn't lead to the rise of some radical islamist state that destabilized the whole region. right?
And I'm not blaming Republicans, I supported Bush.
Well aren't you a dumbfuck. So who you rootin' for now?
The problem being addressed there was a source of long-term instability in the world as a whole, and the middle east in particular, that was affecting the price of basically everything, but most especially oil.
It's a subtle thing, but there's an "uncertainty" premium bolted on to everything you buy. It's like insurance. The government at the time thought it could reduce those insurance premiums by invading Iraq. It may have been right, it may have been wrong - frankly it's extremely hard to tell, even if you do know what you're looking for - but that was the calculation, it was their decision to make, and I for one am not willing to condemn them even if they did, on this occasion, get it wrong, because it was their decision to make.
How democracy works is, you elect people you (on the whole) trust to make those decisions on your behalf. Sometimes they'll be right, sometimes they'll be wrong. But if they get it right more often than the other guy would have, you're winning. One thing you can be sure of - either of them will get it right far more often than you give them credit for, because you don't even notice 999 out of 1000 of their decisions.
So you're in favor of corrupt government because of all the things it might be doing that aren't entirely corrupt, sometimes? No thanks
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
- Matthew 6:21
At least I think that is his argument, that they have fat Swiss bank accounts and thus they are, in their hearts, Swiss.
Nonsense. Just tell the politician, *If you want my vote, pay me*. We can be much more expensive than any lobbyist.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
That's so dumb. You want regular voters to grub for a little cash while the money guys lock down defense spending budgets for the next decade...how exactly does that help any of us?
They need our vote no matter how much they spend on the campaign. Without it they cannot occupy the office despite the billions spent by their financiers. Make 'em pay us like they pay the lobbyist. For us the effort is trivial. But, if you like things the way they are, knock yourself out. Use your power, or don't. Just don't blame the "system", or the damn "Russians". You all did this to yourselves, in the effort to do it to each other.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
"Make 'em pay us like they pay the lobbyist. For us the effort is trivial."
Trivial? Sure, I'll rent some office space, put together an LLC and spend thousands on drink and dinners.
"Just don't blame the "system", or the damn "Russians". You all did this to yourselves, in the effort to do it to each other."
Oh. You're just a typical victim blamer, complete with batshit insane reasons for why this is happening and what we can do to fix it. Shouldn't have worn such a short skirt, huh?
Ah, yes, pull out the passive/aggressive "victimization" routine. Works every time, on the believers maybe. Sorry pal, you're no victim. It is fully consensual with full knowledge, and still is. Every two years you still say, yes, yes, YES! Gimme more of that!
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”