Sponsored Content

Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

« Rubio Needs to Step Aside and Clear the Field For Ted Cruz, Not Vice Versa | Main | Black Opinion Leaders Starting to Endorse Bernie »
February 23, 2016

Judge To Decide If Hillary's Aides Can Be Questioned About Their Role in the Illegal Server Set-Up
Plus, an Update to the Apple Story

The judge will be ruling on Judicial Watch's motion to permit questioning of Hillary's aidesas to their role, and Hillary's, in setting up the illegal server.

Fingers crossed.

Speaking of matters legal and technical, Loaf of Ungrateful Bread has a good post explaining, contra my claims yesterday, that there is in fact a law which permits judges to impress citizens into aiding law enforcement.

That's where the contentious February 16, 2016, order (PDF) comes in. Using the All Writs Act--a modern version of a law the American Founders passed in the first Congress--a federal magistrate judge has ordered Apple to help the FBI gain access to the device’s contents. Under the All Writs Act, a court can order a third party who stands in the way of administering justice to provide assistance so long as an alternative is not available, the ordered assistance is not unduly burdensome, and the third party is reasonably compensated.

I suppose Apple's contention is that this is unduly burdensome, but my post yesterday suggesting this was "unprecedented" was completely wrong.

Gabe also says the FBI isn't looking to keep the skeleton key, once cut:

In other words, the FBI wants to bring Farook's iPhone to Apple, let the manufacturer perform the temporary update, and then allow the FBI to remotely perform a brute force attack to discover Farook's passcode. Once the FBI has discovered the passcode, Apple simply reverses the update and returns the iPhone with its original software and contents to the FBI.

Apparently the FBI is in fact asking Apple for the sort of assistance least injurious to its security system: Gabe says they'd let Apple retain the phone in its security-crippled state, while the FBI attempted the brute-force manner of cracking the security code (which shouldn't take all that long -- 10,000 or even 100,000 variations in a possible touchpad security code could take days to break for a computer).

That way, the key is never not in Apple's sole possession. I suppose the FBI could try to hack the key as they perform this operation, but I also suppose Apple could have people on staff watching for just that, and ready to stop them. And then go to the court saying, accurately, the FBI has violated its own conditions.

It's a good post. If these things are true, Apple's position is weaker than it seemed to me.

Test Case? Sometimes an organization -- the ACLU, and advocacy group, the government -- will contrive a White Knight case where all the facts are charming and likable, in order to get a ruling which they will then use as precedent in other cases.

This is an interesting bit from Investor's Business Daily, cited here by EFF:

"They don't even really care about the data on this particular phone (as evidenced by the facts that this is the suspect's work phone -- he destroyed his personal phones -- and that they're conducting this litigation in public rather than under seal). They chose this particular set of facts to create a precedent," Nate Cardozo, staff attorney for Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote via e-mail.

That could very well be the case. So we should put aside the Politically Attractive Rubio-Like Facts in this case and consider just the general principle:

If law enforcement has a legitimate reason to get into a secure phone, and a judge is persuaded of this and signs an order to compel, do we want the government to be able to do this?

You need to think about this in two different cases. Not just the one that most people fixate on. People pick one of the below two scenarios and only think about that one. But you gotta think about both.

The two scenarios are:

1. The government wants to get into your phone.

2. The government wants to get into the phone of the guy it strongly suspects, but cannot prove, is the man responsible for your daughter's murder.

I think both have to be kept in mind. I think it's unserious to only think "the government is out to get me," and equally unserious to think "The government has only pure motives and I should give it whatever power it wants to chase Bad Guys."

digg this
posted by Ace at 03:40 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
insurgens ad opus : "Hard to exaggerate how much Marx hated Christianit ..."

JT: "Has to be mid 40s but been breezy all day, wish ha ..."

Unanonymous Jon: "David French met Jesus Christ and found Him lackin ..."

Skip: "Has to be mid 40s but been breezy all day, wish ha ..."

AZ deplorable moron: "Note to self, throwing the pulley into grumpy's ya ..."

Dr. Bone: "Love the hole repair clip, but I'm a moron and don ..."

Diogenes: "FWP. I was mowing the front with a riding mower wh ..."

BlackOrchid: "[I]Oh, and foot? Seems it's just a bone bruise (th ..."

Blanco Basura - Z28.310 [/i] [/b] [/u] [/s]: "[i]I think eucalyptus, from Australia, was planted ..."

G'rump928(c): "Having the mower up on blocks will give me the cha ..."

G'rump928(c): "FWP. I was mowing the front with a riding mower w ..."

Notsothoreau: "It looks like the rhubarb and some strawberries su ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64