# 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:** 9
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/161 "2014-09-29T20:29:26Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I know this is mostly meant as a throwaway clever comment, but it also exposes your lack of understanding of the issue. One key reason why so much military equipment has ended up in the hands of local law enforcement is that it is either free or at a very low cost, either from DoD surplus or from grants issued by DOJ or DHS. So if you think that some police department paid $1 million for an MRAP and they could have used that money more wisely, you’re missing the fundamental point that they did not pay $1 million for the MRAP. > Now, I wasn’t literally talking about the precise things that Jimmy did in the TV show, but you make valid points. The main intent of my post is that using specialized methods to overcome encryption on devices by planting various tools is just simply beyond the reach of most police departments. ( **Steve MB** got my point in the post before yours.) > > You make totally fair points that quite a bit of data may be available in other ways. However, I don’t think you, me, or anyone else here is actually qualified to make broad statements about what sort of information the police need, or do not need, to make a case against a particular criminal or suspect. Sure, if someone takes a photo of their crime and it is synced to iCloud and the GPS tagging is on, that’s helpful to the police. But, what if someone knows a meager amount about technology yet knows to turn GPS tagging off and does not sync to iCloud? So that photo of the crime (or the calendar information of "Be at major drug deal at 2:30pm at the Bay City Warehouse, etc) only exists on the phone in an encrypted format? You seem to be arguing that if police couldn’t get that specific information, then they should just simply make their case elsewhere. I don’t think it’s fair to police to have probable cause, a judge’s sign-off, but no technical means to execute the warrant for potentially very valuable information (at least in this context). > > It seems to me that such evidence would be extremely valuable, and quite likely beyond the reach of law enforcement due to both the encryption scheme used and the application of the Fifth Amendment (in which someone quite possibly – but not certainly – might not be compelled to give up passwords, combinations, or that sort of testimonial information). That evidence would be valuable, but stopping criminals or nation states from looking on people’s phones without permission is also valuable. I’m particularly worried about countries other than the USA and criminals though I also don’t want the USA snooping without a warrant. Your example is also pretty weak. I don’t understand how they happen on his phone and look at his calendar without having him in custody already or at least knowing you looked. I think encryption keys and the Fifth are all over the place to date and there is no consensus, but I could be wrong. If authorities have the person in custody, they can at least try to have the court force the defendant to give up the password in at least some cases, though again I’m not sure about case law. If they don’t have access to the suspect, they won’t have access to the suspect’s physical phone anyway so encryption of data at rest is moot. I would be interested in actual cases where encryption would have hurt the prosecution. I have to admit even if an example is found, I’d still think it was an exception and doubt it will change my opinion. The cat is out of the bag as far as encryption unless you want to make it illegal. I can’t even fathom that the government suddenly thinks this is a debate again after the crypto wars of the 1990s. Look up the clipper chip fiasco. It is bad for privacy, information security, democracy, and the US economy to try and ban or weaken encryption. On top of all that, I’m skeptical how much it will actually hurt law enforcement not to have a back door. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/162 "2014-09-29T20:34:25Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I do not suspect that many people are happy about being the subject of court orders, as a general matter, so I don’t take the measure of justice to be the degree of joyfulness in fulfilling one’s responsibilities. For example, if I’m ever brought up on charges of my wit being an actual deadly weapon, I’ll simply be grateful that 12 jurors are hearing the case, and not be too concerned with complying with their wishes that they be excused to go do something else. This isn’t about people who are the subject of court orders. It’s about companies being made to comply with the federal government even when the government is breaking the law or acting without the public’s knowledge. The companies seem to feel that this violates the wishes of their customers and their own particular codes of ethics. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/163 "2014-09-29T20:35:03Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > As you rightly say, anyone can encrypt stuff if they choose, and the government can’t really do anything about that. It _can_ do something about products being sold that way by default, and as such not give a helping hand to criminals too stupid or ignorant to know what to hide. “So anyone can encrypt stuff if they choose, and the government can’t really do anything about that,” which means you agree with the side you’re arguing against. “Anyone” includes the people that own, operate, and work at Apple, Google, and other companies. Unless they pass a law against it, the government can’t do anything about it except what they have already done for years, which is apply a lot of pressure in the background, including subverting public cryptographic algorithms and more. I’m not okay with this for many of the reasons I’ve already argued in this thread, but at least a law would be the right way to do it rather than all the back room dealings. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/164 "2014-09-29T20:49:38Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > This isn’t about people who are the subject of court orders. It’s about companies being made to comply with the federal government even when the government is breaking the law or acting without the public’s knowledge. Let’s just get this straight: this has fuck-all to do with Edward Snowden, if that’s what you’re saying. This is about police, whether local or Federal, with a search warrant (pursuant to the recent Supreme Court case which so directed), being able to execute such a search. Previously, Apple or whomever could be compelled to satisfy that court order, or so I’ve read. That will not be possible on these newer devices. So yes, it actually is about court orders and search warrants, and has nothing to do with FISA. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/165 "2014-09-29T20:51:20Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Let’s just get this straight: this has fuck-all to do with Edward Snowden, if that’s what you’re saying. The public’s distrust of governmental surveillance and its interest in greater security for electronic devices has a great deal to do with Edward Snowden. ---
**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 29, 2014, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/166 "2014-09-29T20:54:53Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The public’s distrust of governmental surveillance and its interest in greater security for electronic devices has a great deal to do with Edward Snowden. And it shouldn’t, but that’s just another symptom of the problem with for-profit journalism that has yet to be responsibly addressed. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/167 "2014-09-29T21:00:06Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And it shouldn’t, but that’s just another symptom of the problem with for-profit journalism that has yet to be responsibly addressed. Are you going to attack liberals for supporting the First Amendment next? ---
**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 29, 2014, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/168 "2014-09-29T21:05:19Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Are you going to attack liberals for supporting the First Amendment next? No. My anger with the press is directed at those who see it as at a source of revenue instead as as a conduit of the public good. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/169 "2014-09-29T21:13:14Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The public’s distrust of governmental surveillance and its interest in greater security for electronic devices has a great deal to do with Edward Snowden. Are we referring to the same public that supported the invasion of Iraq to go get those WMDs that were threatening every shopping mall in this country with those scary, death-spraying UAVs? Sorry, I don’t alter my views to make them coincide with the general public’s level of understanding about an issue. You can’t make me say that Vikings wore helmets with horns on the sides just because everyone really, really thinks that they did; and you can’t make this issue into something about FISA when it really doesn’t. Unfortunately, your argument here is veering off into the non-reality based community that some Bush White House staff member talked about; where those people think that observing and studying reality is simply obsolete, and the real action is in manipulating how people think about things. Any discussion Technology + Laws does not equal OMG MASS GOVRNMENTAL SURVEILLANCE STATE!1! I think we’re actually better off if we avoid cheap and lazy debates like that, or at least try to isolate them to Fox News on the right, the Guardian on the left, and other shitty brands of journalism everywhere else in between. ---
**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 29, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/170 "2014-09-29T21:17:17Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I do not suspect that many people are happy about being the subject of court orders, as a general matter, so I don’t take the measure of justice to be the degree of joyfulness in fulfilling one’s responsibilities. The point of the exercise is to shift the responsibility to the actual responsible party (the phone owner) and leave tangentially related third parties (Apple and Google) out of it so they can focus on the stuff for which the are actually responsible (making phones that serve their customers’ needs). Really, this is a simple concept. If the police can’t find fingerprints on a baseball bat that was soaked in bleach, should they subpoena the Spaulding and Clorox companies? If the police couldn’t read something because it was written in Klingon, should they subpoena Marc Okrand? ---
**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 29, 2014, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/171 "2014-09-29T21:19:16Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > No. My anger with the press is directed at those who see it as at a source of revenue instead as as a conduit of the public good. Well, in this case both were served. You may rail at the invisible hand of the market because it flipped you the finger, but don’t expect the rest of us to sympathize. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Are we referring to the same public that supported the invasion of Iraq to go get those WMDs that were threatening every shopping mall in this country with those scary, death-spraying UAVs? James B. Comey is attempting to appeal to that public with his ZOMG TERRAISTS THINKA TEH CHILDRUN!!! rhetoric. Unfortuntely for him, that public has wised up after been burned too many times. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/172 "2014-09-29T21:25:37Z")
Come on – the point of the exercise is for the tech companies to one-up each other on saying, “We are the securist!” “No, my security is a gazillion times better!” “Your phone is as secure as a wet paper bag!” I get that, and it makes sense. I’m just don’t think our laws are yet able to deal with that situation, and that there will be consequences. But get real – you don’t seriously propose the idea that Apple and Google are out of the business of dealing with what information is on a phone? You think Google is going to stop monitoring what websites you visit on your phone, or stop screening Gmail to better target advertisements? You think Apple isn’t collecting traffic data while you are navigating, and probably selling your iTunes listening habits or whatnot? You call this type of activity “tangientially related?” No, of course not. Those companies aren’t getting out of the data business, and you know it. And as far as the Chlorox analogy, I think you’re back to making up these scenarios that aren’t even really on topic at all… and your Klingon comment has me totally baffled. Did you wander into the wrong thread right then? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/173 "2014-09-29T21:31:49Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > James B. Comey is attempting to appeal to that public with his ZOMG TERRAISTS THINKA TEH CHILDRUN!!! rhetoric. I see – I looked at his radical, saber-rattling statement on the matter: > [@](#): > > “I am a huge believer in the rule of law, but I also believe that no one in this country is beyond the law. What concerns me about this is companies marketing something expressly to allow people to place themselves beyond the law.” Holy shit, this guy is like Che Guevara crossed with Charles Manson on his over the top rhetoric! How did he ever get through Senate confirmation with this Rush Limbaugh-like penchant for exaggeration!?!? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/174 "2014-09-29T21:39:42Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > No. My anger with the press is directed at those who see it as at a source of revenue instead as as a conduit of the public good. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Are we referring to the same public that supported the invasion of Iraq to go get those WMDs that were threatening every shopping mall in this country with those scary, death-spraying UAVs? Somehow my post triggered a staggering burst of irrelevance. > [@](#): > > Any discussion Technology + Laws does not equal OMG MASS GOVRNMENTAL SURVEILLANCE STATE!1! My argument is that the recent disclosures of mass surveillance are coloring this discussion: there is more demand for security and encryption because the public recently discovered the government is spying on the public en masse. The government demonstrated it wasn’t trustworthy, so now people don’t trust it as much as they did. I’m not saying that those disclosures justify every possible security countermeasure, but it’s foolish to pretend that’s not going on. Do you think Apple would be doing this otherwise? I doubt it. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s going to take more than “this has fuck-all to do with Edward Snowden” to convince me. ---
**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 29, 2014, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/175 "2014-09-29T21:40:14Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > But get real – you don’t seriously propose the idea that Apple and Google are out of the business of dealing with what information is on a phone? You think Google is going to stop monitoring what websites you visit on your phone, or stop screening Gmail to better target advertisements? You think Apple isn’t collecting traffic data while you are navigating, and probably selling your iTunes listening habits or whatnot? You should be ashamed of yourself for using the “she’s a slut; she doesn’t get to complain about being groped” argument. > [@](#): > > I am a huge believer in the rule of law, but _I also believe that no one in this country is beyond the law_. Did he say that part with a straight face? Without the aid of Botox? I’m impressed by his chutzpah, if not his rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/176 "2014-09-29T21:46:39Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > You should be ashamed of yourself for using the “she’s a slut; she doesn’t get to complain about being groped” argument. Uhhhh… put down the ether rag, because I have no clue what you’re talking about. ---
**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 29, 2014, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/177 "2014-09-29T21:55:24Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Uhhhh… put down the ether rag, because I have no clue what you’re talking about. Puh-leeze. I am making an obvious and ironclad analogy between 1. You gave some of your data to Google, so don’t complain about government snooping and 1. You spread your legs for three of the guys on the swim team, so don’t get so pissy about a little boob-squeeze The two positions are self-evidently equivalent. You advocated for Position 1. Position 2 is unacceptable in polite society. QED. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/178 "2014-09-29T21:57:38Z")
Oh, I get you – complying with a search warrant is like sexual assault. Well, I’ll just leave you to wallow in your outrage at the checks and balances of our judicial system that perpetrates intellectual rape on major American corporations, or something. By the way, you’re the one who said that Google and Apple are only “tangentially” related to data collection. And you still have no clue about the difference between “snooping” and “putting a murderer behind bars,” do you? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/179 "2014-09-29T22:03:01Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Oh, I get you – complying with a search warrant is like sexual assault. He just spelled out his analogy for you. Are you going to try to address it, or are you going to act outraged so you don’t have to address it? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2014, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/180 "2014-09-29T22:13:00Z")
It’s patently stupid, and offensive to boot. I’m afraid trying to describe why a search warrant is not like sexual assault is as difficult to describe as how I am like a writing desk. BTW, are you aware of the facts of the cases that led to the Supreme Court (correctly IMHO) ruling that search warrants are required before police can intrude on a cell phone? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=10)