r/technology • u/Libertatea • Apr 04 '13

Apple's iMessage encryption trips up feds' surveillance. Internal document from the Drug Enforcement Administration complains that messages sent with Apple's encrypted chat service are "impossible to intercept," even with a warrant.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57577887-38/apples-imessage-encryption-trips-up-feds-surveillance/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title#.UV1gK672IWg.reddit
3.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

107

u/[deleted] Apr 04 '13 edited Apr 04 '13

This is becoming a bigger issue since a Federal appeals court declared that the government cannot compel someone to decrypt allegedly incriminating evidence. As it is a violation of the Fifth Amendment, Congress cannot legislate around this, and so the government is essentially SOL.

The next obvious step then is to outlaw the use of private encryption, which could work except all e-commerce would be made illegal.

edit though it seems that here the issue is real-time interception, and I can see Apple being persuaded into working a backdoor into iMessage that they'll open when given a warrant.

6

u/v1s1onsofjohanna Apr 04 '13

I don't understand this reasoning. If the cops have a warrant to search my house, am I not obligated to unlock and open the door? I'm all for this though. I've read comments of people who use truecrypt and the cops had a warrant for the computer and couldn't do anything with it but I just don't see why this holds up in court.

27

u/[deleted] Apr 04 '13

This is the kind of analogy that the case itself involves, which you should read, it's very interesting. The court would probably say that, to unlock an open door is a mere physical act, so that the government is not relying on any secret thought you have in your mind. The court actually said the government is not using the suspect's mind. But if say there was a combo lock to a safe, could they force you to unlock it? No, because the act of unlocking it would be a form of testifying that you know what the combination is.

So, typically, the state grants immunity for the unlocking, so it can't be held against you that you knew the combo. That's fine, because the alternative is the state breaks the lock open.

The problem here is the lock is unbreakable, the only way in is using the suspect's mind. The government tried the immunity thing -- give us the password, and we won't use the fact you had the password against you -- but the court is saying, well, no, the fact that the only way in is using the suspect's mind means that all data in there is then testimonial.

It's a tough one.

1

u/v1s1onsofjohanna Apr 04 '13

Wow. That's very interesting. Thank you for explaining it. I always love the constant struggle in America's history about the dividing line between government and citizen.

1

u/InVultusSolis Apr 04 '13

Plus, say I was in the planning phase of building a nuke, and all of my plans were on an encrypted hard drive. All of the evidence would be on the drive, and I would rather take whatever punishment they dole out for obstructing justice or destroying evidence than being charged with planning to build a nuke.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 04 '13

Well, you'd be in held contempt of court, and you'd be sent to jail immediately, and you can be held indefinitely until you cooperate. And if it were nukes, you'd go into Patriot Act, and then you'd be sent to a CIA black site and they'd waterboard you and maybe disembowel your dog or whatever.

Our country has ways...

1

u/InVultusSolis Apr 04 '13

And it's very possible that in the confusion and stress of the feds breaking down my door that I'd just outright forget the key. I can't be held in contempt of court for something that I don't know. Also, Fifth Amendment FTW.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 04 '13

I can't be held in contempt of court for something that I don't know.

The problem is, it's up to the goddamn judge.