# Is the FBI right in decrying the stronger encryption about to come to smartphones? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 28, 2014, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754 "2014-09-28T02:28:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/41 "2014-09-28T18:57:45Z")
> [@KarlGauss](#): > > The FBI (and various police forces) have strongly condemned plans for both Apple iPhones and those coming from Google to soon be much more resistant to ‘cracking’. [Here’s one of many articles of relevance](http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/2014/09/25/68c4e08e-4344-11e4-9a15-137aa0153527_story.html). From the article: > [@](#): > > FBI Director James B. Comey sharply criticized Apple and Google on Thursday for developing forms of smartphone encryption so secure that law enforcement officials cannot easily gain access to information stored on the devices — _even when_ they have valid search warrants. (emphasis added) Er, he isn’t exactly helping his case with an implicit admission that, ah, sometimes they happen to have a valid search warrant, sometimes not, eh, whatevs. > [@Smapti](#): > > No, they have the for-profit media to blame You got a problem with profit? Sounds un-American to me! Better keep closer tabs on you, _comrade_… ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/42 "2014-09-28T19:07:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are legal behaviors that people might still legitimately like to keep private. It’s no one’s business what hygiene products I buy, or what health problems I have, etc. You already voluntarily divulge that information to for-profit corporations day in and day out. Why do you care if the government knows, and why do you think the government _cares_? This is all circular; the argument boils down to “I don’t want the government in my business because the government shouldn’t be in my business, and they shouldn’t be in my business because I don’t want them in my business.” ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/43 "2014-09-28T19:07:32Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Apple and Google are taking reasonable steps to help improve security across the board. The fact that those measures happen to make things tougher for law enforcement is incidental. Precisely. It boils down to irrefutable facts: 1. Electronic communication and commerce are essential to modern civilization. 2. Electronic communication and commerce needs strong security (considerably better than it has now) to prevent it from being crippled by cybercrooks. 3. The level of security required is incompatible with the routine mass surveillance upon which the Feds have become indolently dependent. Q. E.D. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/44 "2014-09-28T19:09:52Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > This is high-grade nonsense. A train of thought beloved of fascist states everywhere. You insist on calling me names as if name-calling suffices for an argument. Do you think I’ll be so shamed by a dirty name that I’ll concede to being wrong? > [@](#): > > Are you seriously suggesting that you are happy for the government to know everything you do or say? Legal or otherwise? If I’m not doing anything illegal, then the government has no reason to care what I’m doing in the first place, and they won’t bother with me. If I’m doing something illegal, then I have no right to hide it from the government, and I deserve to be captured and punished for it. > [@](#): > > Can I put a camera in your bedroom? I don’t know. _Can_ you? ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/45 "2014-09-28T19:10:08Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > So why are you so worried that the government will find out you’re behaving legally? I’m not. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/46 "2014-09-28T19:12:45Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You already voluntarily divulge that information to for-profit corporations day in and day out. Some do. Some opt out. I expect one of the following in your next post: 1. A link to the NSA, CIA, and FBI “opt-out” links. 2. An admission that you made a fool of yourself (again). > [@](#): > > the argument boils down to “I don’t want the government in my business because the government shouldn’t be in my business, and they shouldn’t be in my business because I don’t want them in my business.” Which is correct. I assert my rights for any reason, or no reason. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/47 "2014-09-28T19:17:32Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Do you think I’ll be so shamed by a dirty name that I’ll concede to being wrong? I’m sure none of us expects you to be shamed under any circumstances whatsoever. > [@](#): > > If I’m doing something illegal, then I have no right to hide it from the government, and I deserve to be captured and punished for it. Say, were you that guy yelling “They’re in the attic!” at that performance of _The Diary of Anne Frank_? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/48 "2014-09-28T19:19:10Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Some do. Some opt out. Good luck opting out of having a bank account, being filmed by convenience store security cameras, or using the internet. I practically guarantee Walmart knows more about your vaunted and sacred “private” information than the government does. > [@](#): > > Which is correct. I assert my rights for any reason, or no reason. So it’s less a matter of any actual harm or need for protection, than it is a matter of being the entitled jackass shouting at the cashier about how I PAY YOUR SALARY and THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/49 "2014-09-28T19:20:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I think **KarlGauss** ’s question is: is there any successful legal defense available for the phone owner? For example, can he say that requiring him to provide the password forces him to incriminate himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment? Well, I _wish_ it had been my question (thanks). Upthread, an allusion was made to case law about such situations. Can you help, please, **Bricker** , _esq_. My opinion, as uninformed as it is, is that _of course_ a warrant should compel a person to disclose his password (as well as to surrender the phone that uses it). If not, the warrant is a powerless tool and I will presume that would be unacceptable to legislators and the courts. Regarding the specific defence of ‘self incrimination’, such a tactic obviously won’t work to deny law enforcement entrance into your home if they had a warrant to search it. “Officers, don’t come in because what you find here may incriminate me”? How are smartphones different? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/50 "2014-09-28T19:21:14Z")
> [@Ethilrist](#): > > I’m not. Then what _are_ you worried about? ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/51 "2014-09-28T19:30:18Z")
> [@KarlGauss](#): > > My opinion, as uninformed as it is, is that _of course_ a warrant should compel a person to disclose his password (as well as to surrender the phone that uses it). If not, the warrant is a powerless tool and I will presume that would be unacceptable to legislators and the courts. I now realize that the only thing that counts is whether it’s unacceptable to the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Wolf333](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolf333/32/3460_2.png) [@Wolf333](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolf333)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/52 "2014-09-28T19:50:54Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > … > If I’m not doing anything illegal, then the government has no reason to care what I’m doing in the first place, and they won’t bother with me. **If I’m doing something illegal, then I have no right to hide it from the government** , and I deserve to be captured and punished for it… Bolding mine Fifth Amendment be damned! ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/53 "2014-09-28T19:51:24Z")
This isn’t about mass surveillance, it’s about the police not being able to execute a legitimate warrant. Questions about whether a private individual can put a camera in your bedroom - or even whether the FBI can without a warrant - are irrelevant. The question that matters is, should technology be sold that, by default, acts in a manner that is solely designed to hide things from searches _even when those searches are legitimate_? It has nothing to do with spying or cybercrime, as no-one is suggesting banning encryption, only ensuring that manufacturer-provided encryption can be broken by the manufacturer should they receive a warrant. It’s not a privacy issue, as you don’t have a right to privacy in the face of a search warrant. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/54 "2014-09-28T19:54:19Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Er, he isn’t exactly helping his case with an implicit admission that, ah, sometimes they happen to have a valid search warrant, sometimes not, eh, whatevs. Also note his use of the word “easily.” Which suggests they could maybe still get the data- it would just be harder. > [@Steophan](#): > > This isn’t about mass surveillance, it’s about the police not being able to execute a legitimate warrant.[…] It’s not a privacy issue, as you don’t have a right to privacy in the face of a search warrant. Recent events have taught most of us that we can expect the government to go through our data even without a warrant. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/55 "2014-09-28T19:55:19Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > This isn’t about mass surveillance, it’s about the police not being able to execute a legitimate warrant. Questions about whether a private individual can put a camera in your bedroom - or even whether the FBI can without a warrant - are irrelevant. > > The question that matters is, should technology be sold that, by default, acts in a manner that is solely designed to hide things from searches _even when those searches are legitimate_? It has nothing to do with spying or cybercrime, as no-one is suggesting banning encryption, only ensuring that manufacturer-provided encryption can be broken by the manufacturer should they receive a warrant. > > It’s not a privacy issue, as you don’t have a right to privacy in the face of a search warrant. It is a privacy issue and it is not “solely designed to hide things from searches.” It is designed to protect customers from illegal searches. If the government wants to search a phone, they can present a warrant to the phone’s owner/user just like they present a warrant to the owner or occupant of a house rather than the builder of the house. Do you feel the same way about computers? There has been nary a peep of complaint that full disk encryption has become easy and available for laptops for years. Most businesses use full disk encryption for both privacy and to protect trade secrets, including on phones. If there is a back door for the government, it can also be leveraged by adversaries. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/56 "2014-09-28T19:58:02Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Then what _are_ you worried about? That the cops would prevent me from buying a piece of software or downloading an app that would allow me to secure my stuff from unsavory types, just so they can get at somebody else’s unsavory stuff. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/57 "2014-09-28T20:02:58Z")
This isn’t _just_ about protection from overweening government agents. A bunch of famous people have just had some of their private pictures leaked all over the Internet. If The Company (whichever company it is) has a “backdoor” to my data, that is not only something that can be used by the government (either legitimately, acting upon a warrant issued upon probable cause and particularly describing the object of the search…or maybe not so legitimately), it is _also_ potentially something that some busy little hacker could find out about and exploit. If there’s been a rash of home invasion robberies in my neighborhood, I have a right to install stronger doors and put burglar bars on my windows. That this might also inconvenience some hypothetical SWAT team is just too darned bad. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/58 "2014-09-28T20:06:27Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You mock the question, but you don’t answer it. If you’re not breaking the law, why do you care if the government knows what you’re up to? Because there’s a fundamental human right to privacy which needs to be respected and is an inherent part of the natural value of human beings? More pragmatically, because I do not trust my government unconditionally? Because it is not some vast, monolithic entity with the sole purpose of doing good (this is almost exactly the same spiel I give conservatives who blame “big government” for everything wrong with the world) but rather is made up of _people_. And people can be vindictive, shitty, and all-around unpleasant. The fact that I very much enjoy Twixie shipping involving particularly violent and vindictive sex is entirely _legal_. But would I want the cop who has pulled me over to know that I’m into that shit? Do you think it would increase his odds of being unfair to me if he saw those pictures on my phone? Or hell, just a simpler example - a closeted gay teacher in the south. > [@Smapti](#): > > You already voluntarily divulge that information to for-profit corporations day in and day out. Why do you care if the government knows, and why do you think the government _cares_? > > This is all circular; the argument boils down to “I don’t want the government in my business because the government shouldn’t be in my business, and they shouldn’t be in my business because I don’t want them in my business.” It’s not circular, it’s axiomatic. “They shouldn’t be in my business because the right to privacy is a fundamental human right”. > [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Say, were you that guy yelling “They’re in the attic!” at that performance of _The Diary of Anne Frank_? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/59 "2014-09-28T20:14:50Z")
> [@theR](#): > > If there is a back door for the government, it can also be leveraged by adversaries. Well, yes. There’s a necessary trade off between total privacy or security and allowing the police to do their job. It seems to me that a reasonable compromise is allowing someone to make an active choice to encrypt, but not having it done by default. Along with making it a serious crime not to decrypt a drive when faced with a warrant, with no allowance for not remembering the password. That would reduce the need for back doors. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/60 "2014-09-28T20:22:52Z")
How about something like the following. Company has decrypt key. Government has a different one. Heck, maybe make a third party who’s only job is to have yet another key and keep it safe until needed. All two/three needed to get the job done. Allows warrants to be executed, but nefarious hacking attempts would be a bitch to pull off. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=4)