[hcs-d] Government wiretapping

Byron Hood byron.hood at college.harvard.edu
Mon Sep 27 20:51:00 EDT 2010


While I'm no lawyer, it seems unlikely that any such mandate would hold up
in court. Plus, to access said encrypted data, the government would still
technically need a warrant.
The 4th amendment prohibits the government from accessing the information
without a search warrant, so any charges they tried to bring against people
based on evidence obtained without a warrant would be thrown out before you
can say "constitutional rights".
And remember that the 5th amendment means that people have the right to
confront the evidence against them -- in particular the witnesses against
them -- making any charges doubly difficult for the government...

It's not to say that I approve of this policy. Honestly, why the
intelligence community goes to such lengths to avoid appropriate legal
processes (such as search warrants) boggles the mind. Particularly when
there are special courts set up specifically for the purpose of issuing
warrants for sensitive investigations.

Byron

P.S. If there are any lawyers who would like to correct my layman's
interpretation of the law, please feel free!

--
Byron Hood
Harvard College '13
Quincy House


On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 20:05, Zak Stone <zstone at gmail.com> wrote:

> I imagine most businesses will vehemently oppose the legislation:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/business/global/28secure.html
>
> Zak
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Zak Stone <zstone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It may be time to lobby Congress, folks, especially if there are plans
> > to somehow prohibit individuals from using strong encryption
> > technology. This legislation hasn't passed yet.
> >
> > Zak
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Joe Zimmerman <joe at hcs.harvard.edu>
> wrote:
> >> Not to mention the entirety of Nineteen Eighty-Four.
> >>
> >> -Joe
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Siddarth Chandrasekaran
> >> <chandrasekaran.siddarth at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Frighteningly relevant:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DRAD-j8ObI
> >>> "There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even
> >>> now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will
> >>> soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in
> >>> lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words
> >>> offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the
> >>> enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly
> >>> wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice,
> >>> intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to
> >>> object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and
> >>> systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your
> >>> submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame?"
> >>>
> >>> Siddarth
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Jim Danz <danz at fas.harvard.edu>
> wrote:
> >>> > What?  That's never happened to me on NYT and I'm definitely not a
> >>> > member.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Carl Jackson <carl at avtok.com>
> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://imgur.com/tyiT0
> >>> >>
> >>> >> In other news, this is really really unfortunate. I'll probably say
> >>> >> more
> >>> >> angry words when I figure out how to read the article :P
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Carl
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Sep 27, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Greg Brockman wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > Looks like the government is considering mandating communication
> >>> >> > service providers to put backdoors in their softwares' crypto:
> >>> >> > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?_r=1
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Any thoughts?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Best,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Greg
> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
> >>> >> > hcs-discuss mailing list
> >>> >> > hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> >>> >> > https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> hcs-discuss mailing list
> >>> >> hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> >>> >> https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > hcs-discuss mailing list
> >>> > hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> >>> > https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> hcs-discuss mailing list
> >>> hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> >>> https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> hcs-discuss mailing list
> >> hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> >> https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hcs-discuss mailing list
> hcs-discuss at lists.hcs.harvard.edu
> https://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/hcs-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.hcs.harvard.edu/pipermail/hcs-discuss/attachments/20100927/cf21e683/attachment-0001.htm 


More information about the hcs-discuss mailing list