Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants

Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Sanity -> Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 7:21:21 PM)
I caught this on Rotten.com's Daily Rotten: quote: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants "In a brief filed Tuesday afternoon, the coalition says a search warrant signed by a judge is necessary before the FBI or other police agencies can read the contents of Yahoo Mail messages... "Previously opened e-mail is not in 'electronic storage,'" the prosecution wrote in a motion filed last month... Tuesday's brief from Google and the other groups aims to buttress Yahoo's position by saying users who store their e-mail in the cloud enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy that is protected by the U.S. Constitution." http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002423-38.html

luckydawg -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 7:30:29 PM)
So just because Obama is black you don't want him to be able to protect America from evil terrorists. Fucking racist

TheHeretic -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 8:36:39 PM)
I'd say a bunch of lefties had better get their asses busy denouncing this. Unless they would rather admit they didn't mean all that high horse bullshit they were spouting not so long ago...

Brain -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 8:53:54 PM)
I think the change get search warrants very easily so I agree with the judge.

Brain -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 8:56:53 PM)
My prior post should be:I think they can get search warrants very easily so I agree with the judge.

Arpig -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 8:56:55 PM)
It appears the good guys have won http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002722-38.html?tag=mncol;txt I think it would be obvious that there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" I mean what are passwords for if not to provide one with privacy.

TheHeretic -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/16/2010 10:40:34 PM)
Well, Brian, you seem quite happy with being a "subject" of government as well, and this is an issue of how we do things in a free society.

Termyn8or -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 2:27:04 AM)
Ho hum, now me, a dweeb who knows very little about the net has to open a school. Attention...... Any encryption scheme in the US must be registered with the government, save but a very few, and most of those are in the developmental stage and not used as of yet. When you retrieve your email you put in a password, or your PC does it, whichever. It is encrpyted, then decrypted on the other side. When it is decrypted on the other side it is compared with a stored password and it must match or access is, of course, denied. But the government holds what might be termed "master keys" to the algorythms used in all encryption schemes used by any US company, such as an ISP or any other service on the internet. As such it is quite easy for them to hack into any ISP or email provider and use their master key in reverse to get any password. What's more, most email does not encrypt the actual content, so they can look for keywords, such as..... maybe I shouldn't, but you know what I mean. They will not even take a second look at you without reason, as there are simply too many people to watch for the amount of people they have to watch us. They are working on that problem all the time I think. It doesn't matter anyway, do you have any idea how warrants are issued today ? A judge gets a stack of them and signs them, that is all. Get it straight here, if you want true privacy, stay off the net. Period. The owners of this site would probably tell you the same thing as they may have had some things happen, remember certain people had to create a new username ? And CM staff can do nothing about it. Actually I think Cmail is more private than email. While they can get to it, it is not all scanned because it does not go through a regular email server. In other words it is not scanned for certain keywords or phrases. That doesn't mean they can't get to it, it just means it is less likely to come under scrutiny. I'll say this once and others can repeat it to the dense among us. EVERYTHING you type on the net, consider public. EVERYTHING, no exeptions. You want to talk about certain things you are better off in a crowded restaurant or at your kitchen table, or even on the phone. Get it, got it, good. T

rulemylife -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 4:15:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig It appears the good guys have won http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002722-38.html?tag=mncol;txt I think it would be obvious that there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" I mean what are passwords for if not to provide one with privacy. Yes, that was linked to at the end of the original article, which begs the question of why this thread was started when the issue involved was settled prior to that.

pahunkboy -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 4:22:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Ho hum, now me, a dweeb who knows very little about the net has to open a school. Attention...... Any encryption scheme in the US must be registered with the government, save but a very few, and most of those are in the developmental stage and not used as of yet. When you retrieve your email you put in a password, or your PC does it, whichever. It is encrpyted, then decrypted on the other side. When it is decrypted on the other side it is compared with a stored password and it must match or access is, of course, denied. But the government holds what might be termed "master keys" to the algorythms used in all encryption schemes used by any US company, such as an ISP or any other service on the internet. As such it is quite easy for them to hack into any ISP or email provider and use their master key in reverse to get any password. What's more, most email does not encrypt the actual content, so they can look for keywords, such as..... maybe I shouldn't, but you know what I mean. They will not even take a second look at you without reason, as there are simply too many people to watch for the amount of people they have to watch us. They are working on that problem all the time I think. It doesn't matter anyway, do you have any idea how warrants are issued today ? A judge gets a stack of them and signs them, that is all. Get it straight here, if you want true privacy, stay off the net. Period. The owners of this site would probably tell you the same thing as they may have had some things happen, remember certain people had to create a new username ? And CM staff can do nothing about it. Actually I think Cmail is more private than email. While they can get to it, it is not all scanned because it does not go through a regular email server. In other words it is not scanned for certain keywords or phrases. That doesn't mean they can't get to it, it just means it is less likely to come under scrutiny. I'll say this once and others can repeat it to the dense among us. EVERYTHING you type on the net, consider public. EVERYTHING, no exeptions. You want to talk about certain things you are better off in a crowded restaurant or at your kitchen table, or even on the phone. Get it, got it, good. T That does it. I am leaving. T: and where will you go? P: away from this NWO T: and where might that be? P: maybe someone here can tell me.

DarkSteven -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 4:28:08 AM)
Good. I still cannot fathom the government's argument that unopened emails are in electronic storage but opened ones are not. I also cannot understand why a case with clear national implications was decided by a Colorado judge. Looking at it from another angle, it pisses me off that a contract between two private parties - in this case, a consumer and an email provider which states that the provider will not wantonly divulge email contents - would be at risk of being vaporized by the Feds. That's the sort of antiterrorism hysteria fomented by the Bush and Obama administrations.

pahunkboy -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 4:30:09 AM)
All the more reason to know that RFIDs info will be corrupted and misused.

Jeffff -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 6:21:09 AM)
A serious question. Can Snail mail be opened without a warrant? Shouldn't the same law apply?

Sanity -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 6:34:07 AM)
I think what the Feds were trying to claim was something along the line of, the envelope had already been opened and it was lying in a public area. quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff A serious question. Can Snail mail be opened without a warrant? Shouldn't the same law apply?

Termyn8or -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/17/2010 3:44:33 PM)
"Between 1942 and 1945, "V-Mail" (for "Victory Mail") service was available for military mail. Letters were converted into microfilm and reprinted near the destination, to save room on transport vehicles for military cargo.[33]" Snail mail is frequently opened by those other than the addressee. It happens in business every day. However the plot thickens I think if it is marked "personal and confidential" or "to be opened by addressee only". So it is a bit unclear. Suffice it to say that they do whatever they want and compel us to do whatever they want, until we get our heads out of our asses. T

popeye1250 -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/18/2010 12:20:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I caught this on Rotten.com's Daily Rotten: quote: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants "In a brief filed Tuesday afternoon, the coalition says a search warrant signed by a judge is necessary before the FBI or other police agencies can read the contents of Yahoo Mail messages... "Previously opened e-mail is not in 'electronic storage,'" the prosecution wrote in a motion filed last month... Tuesday's brief from Google and the other groups aims to buttress Yahoo's position by saying users who store their e-mail in the cloud enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy that is protected by the U.S. Constitution." http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002423-38.html This should be a simple problem to solve. Don't they make cryptic encoders and scramblers for your computer that encode messages then destroy them? With the technology out there today that should be childsplay.

Sanity -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/19/2010 11:07:45 AM)
An update: quote: DOJ abandons warrantless attempt to read Yahoo e-mail The U.S. Justice Department has abruptly abandoned what had become a high-profile court fight to read Yahoo users' e-mail messages without obtaining a search warrant first. In a two-page brief filed Friday, the Obama administration withdrew its request for warrantless access to the complete contents of the Yahoo Mail accounts under investigation. CNET was the first to report on the Denver case in an article on Tuesday. Yahoo's efforts to fend off federal prosecutors' broad request attracted allies--in the form of Google, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Progress and Freedom Foundation--who argued (PDF) that Americans who keep their e-mail in the cloud enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy that is protected by the U.S. Constitution. Full article at: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002722-38.html

Termyn8or -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/19/2010 12:08:28 PM)
"Don't they make cryptic encoders and scramblers" Yes but the recieving end must have the software that matches the software on the sending end. I suspect some people buy it. When you buy it, for the sale to be legal it must be registered with the government and they must be provided with a back door to thwart the encryption. That's law. Sure it can be broken, like using P2P software which is too difficult to prosecute right now. But to buy encryptoion software the gov can't break will happen in an alley somewhere, and the other end must obtain the software pretty much the same way. If you send them the software over the net it defeats the whole thing. The gov will have it and whether or not they bust anyone they will decompile it and generate their own back door. You are not playing with kids here. T

Aylee -> RE: Justice Dept Demands Email Without Warrants (4/19/2010 5:57:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I also cannot understand why a case with clear national implications was decided by a Colorado judge. Because Colorado has a Federal District Court (all states have at least one) and is also part of Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals which is located in Denver, Colorado. Didn't the case originate federally in Colorado?

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875