SOCNET

Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > Law Enforcement

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 28 November 2018, 10:57
Sado_1's Avatar
Sado_1 Sado_1 is offline
Cynical and Grumpy
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Anywhere, USA
Posts: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fu King Lawyer View Post
"It just means that you will probably never get your phone back and your phone will be destroyed in the process"

Forgive me? When you know you are going to destroy a suspect's property during the execution of the Warrant, do you obtain a Court Order allowing you to do so? Just asking.....
We do. In every single one of my search warrants, and how I have my guys write theirs, is to add the specific verbiage which is not only outlined in the affidavit establishing probable cause but also listed in all of the attachments. This verbiage not only specifically request to use the reasonable force necessary to gain access to the listed place being searched, but also writes and states that irreversible, or irreparable damages will likely occur. For electronic devices, say the process I am requesting is a "chip off", there are a number of pages in the search warrant that not only establish the probable cause, but also specify the process, its validity, its legal basis, its scope and extent, and also the likelihood that such a process will likely result in the destruction of the device itself because for example, this process requires a heating method, which will likely render the device for future use, useless or destroyed. These search warrants are signed and approved by superior court judges or federal judges depending on the case. Personally, I do not like court orders. NC has some vagueness regarding the extent and authority law enforcement possesses to obtain and utilize a court order. I prefer search warrant, by the highest authority available. This type of verbiage I even recommend my guys to use when doing a simple search warrant for drugs or property in a home- ie.., the reasonable force necessary to gain access into the home, the buildings on the property or within the curtilage and items such as safes, locked containers, vehicles, etc. I even used this verbiage and wrote extensively in one search warrant for the permission to dig a mans back yard up knowing, it would damage and destroy the ground itself by the method and manner we would be doing such a process.
Hope this helps
__________________
"The space between life and death, that is where we are most alive"- Floki
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 28 November 2018, 13:09
jerome's Avatar
jerome jerome is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: OCONUS
Posts: 425
^^^
Dude use paragraphs.
__________________
I don't care if I follow your rules. If you can cheat, so can I. I won't let you beat me unfairly I'll beat you unfairly first. -Ender Wiggin

"When policemen break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival." - Billy Jack
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 28 November 2018, 15:04
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 20,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome View Post
^^^
Dude use paragraphs.

^^^^^ For the record, not a dude.....LOL
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 28 November 2018, 23:29
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sado_1 View Post
We do.
.
Hope this helps
Thank you for sharing that...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 7 January 2020, 17:22
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,761
Reviving this thread because:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...naval-n1111636

With the San Diego Muslim terrorist, the FBI took Apple to court and got a federal judge to rule Apple had to assist. Suddenly, the FBI got into the phone (allegedly with the help a 3d party) and withdrew the suit.

Now, we are back to another terrorist incident and the FBI going back at Apple.

My opinion only - while the iphones do upgrade - the fact they got into it with the San Diego terrorist shooting would indicate to a dumb ass like me, that they can replicate it this time around.

Call me paranoid, but I suspect there is a larger effort underway to require them all to provide the FBI with a back door "key" to get past encryption whenever they decide they need to look into our phones.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 7 January 2020, 17:37
Macka's Avatar
Macka Macka is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fu King Lawyer View Post
R

Now, we are back to another terrorist incident and the FBI going back at Apple.

My opinion only - while the iphones do upgrade - the fact they got into it with the San Diego terrorist shooting would indicate to a dumb ass like me, that they can replicate it this time around.

Call me paranoid, but I suspect there is a larger effort underway to require them all to provide the FBI with a back door "key" to get past encryption whenever they decide they need to look into our phones.
In the year before I retired the phone labs and techs we used were able in some circumstances to get into several iPhones. I won't discuss it here but it was happening at the local/regional level.

If anyone decides to commit a crime serious enough to have your phone searched do not use a phone or even bring it to the area. it will be your undoing.
__________________
Freedom costs a Buck 0-5
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 7 January 2020, 17:47
CV's Avatar
CV CV is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 8,858
Your cell phone is the absolute worst device to do most anything on (to include keeping it in your pocket walking around) if you have any concern for privacy. That said, I'm glad organizations are pushing back against the gov. You cannot create a backdoor for the gov and expect it won't be exploited otherwise.

The closest I imagine you could come is by welcoming them (gov) into your own environment and setting up a controlled space for the phone's content to be decrypted and provided. Even then, you've never really given control to the user for their personal information. So, that's a no go.

Even then, I don't trust the actual process for getting judicial approval at this point. Zero confidence in giving the gov access to anything. It's supposed to be annoyingly hard for the government to invade your privacy, if at all. It's by design and is a fundamental right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macka View Post
If anyone decides to commit a crime serious enough to have your phone searched do not use a phone or even bring it to the area. it will be your undoing.
This.
__________________
It's a hipster filter. Keeps your kind out. -Jimbo
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 7 January 2020, 18:22
GirlwithaGlock's Avatar
GirlwithaGlock GirlwithaGlock is offline
Russian Tycoon
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ghost Ranch
Posts: 3,822
Reading about Project Raven last year was very eye-opening to me, as I was not aware that such surveillance capabilities existed. I will not even pretend to understand the technology behind "the hack", but I would personally prefer that it did not exist altogether as the potential for abuse is beyond my threshold of comfort.

(Tightening up my tinfoil wrap) It also makes me wonder (in a rhetorical way), whether this tool has already been used to proactively intercept communications of USCs CONUS... and how many companies like CyberPoint are out there working with friendly foreign governments and how often they accidentally (or not) end up with USCs in their targeting pool.
__________________
Dodge This!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 7 January 2020, 19:03
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,761
One would think the lady's NDAs would prohibit her mention of past, specific functions and her related duties with her USG employer?
Then when I read the article, I stumbled upon her (or the author's) use of
"compartmentalized" vs. "compartmented". Little things like that make me wonder if she or the publisher weren't fully informed.

I did get a laugh in the article where it said:
“The FBI is now investigating whether Raven’s American staff leaked classified U.S. surveillance techniques and if they illegally targeted American computer networks”
As to my point in this thread: I suspect the results of the Raven investigation will come in sometime after the investigation of FBI spying on Americans during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 7 January 2020, 19:33
CV's Avatar
CV CV is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 8,858
Here's a good Twitter thread to read and follow from a congressional hearing not long ago. Our government really, truly, sucks. I <3 all my LEO friends here, but this isn't the way.

https://twitter.com/ericgeller/statu...16840249667585
__________________
It's a hipster filter. Keeps your kind out. -Jimbo
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 7 January 2020, 21:21
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,761
Why worry about the "Deep State"?
I read the Politico thread you posted. Politico editorially sounds as if they are for it. Heck, Sens Graham, Feinstein, and NY DA Cy Vance are all in agreement that they need a "key" to the back door. They got to be looking out for all of us, right?.....
What could possibly go wrong with that?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 7 January 2020, 21:23
Silverbullet's Avatar
Silverbullet Silverbullet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bunker
Posts: 16,435
FBI is enemy of the people.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 7 January 2020, 21:32
bobmueller bobmueller is offline
Did...did I do that?
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Green Country, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,246
Here's the NYT article about the same case: www nytimes.com/2020/01/07/technology/apple-fbi-iphone-encryption.html

There are several good comments, but my favorite is at the end.

Quote:
Companies like Facebook are selling the idea that “no matter what you do, you’re completely impervious to government surveillance,” Mr. Barr said. “Do we want to live in a society like that? I don’t think we do.”
Yes, Mr. Attorney General. Yes, I do want to live in a society like that.
__________________
This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 8 January 2020, 10:31
Polypro's Avatar
Polypro Polypro is offline
BTDT
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: A Noisy Bar In Avalon
Posts: 15,268
I have my doubts about the FBI getting into that iPhone, they just didn't want a precedent from preventing them from trying in the future.

But I literally know nothing of Apple's security, other than it's supposed to be good. And, Israel's retired 8200 guys still need to eat, so who knows.

I'm very leery of any device that makes it "easier to use" while still saying they have strong encryption. Even Linux based Android has gone this route - supposedly still secure, but I don't like the phone being able to minimally boot to the UI. I also don't like that even Signal, uses your same device password - but again, I have drifted away from being "Joe Security/Privacy" so maybe all is still good?

I will say, that if I wanted to start putting LASER Beams on Sharks' heads - I'd break out one of my old Nexus 5's running Lineage OS, using LUKS, with a 50 Character Pre-Boot Authentication password, with a different 16 Character Screen Lock password, and a third, unique, long ass password for Signal. Sometimes old is better, and progress just means more 0 Days.

Edit: Oh, and fuck you Bob 'Anti-Gun/Privacy' Barr - the US has been trucking along just fine with guns and encryption, we're not afraid of the minimal crime and almost non-existent "true" terrorism. 2001 called, it wants it's 'Securi-crat' panic back. If we survived 5 bombings a day for 18 months straight in the 70's - we'll be just fine. The people are not afraid - Fuck off.
__________________

Too Funny, Has To Be My Sig For A While...

"FACT: School aged children are more likely to die from the influenza than from the COVID-19... but teachers unions are demanding schools stay shut until we de-fund the police"

Last edited by Polypro; 8 January 2020 at 10:37.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 8 January 2020, 19:45
CV's Avatar
CV CV is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 8,858
When you read that they (FBI) were able to get into n% of phones, that's due to a variance in applied updates to the OS. You should really keep things up to date. Most that get rolled out these days are to close significant security issues.

//nerd-speak with Poly
UX and Encryption are different animals. In trying to narrow that gap, that's where the FBI is bitching to Apple. When you setup your phone, you're storing your keys in the Secure Enclave itself. Apple literally can't get to it, and that's by design. It stays with the device and never leaves that enclave. Hell, you can't even push you own to it. All generation happens within. There's a ton of good literature on Secure Enclave and also how the A7 chipset handles security overall.
__________________
It's a hipster filter. Keeps your kind out. -Jimbo
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 8 January 2020, 20:33
Macka's Avatar
Macka Macka is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,772
Darknet Diaries is a Podcast that did an episode on Project Raven.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...s/id1296350485


Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlwithaGlock View Post
Reading about Project Raven last year was very eye-opening to me, as I was not aware that such surveillance capabilities existed. I will not even pretend to understand the technology behind "the hack", but I would personally prefer that it did not exist altogether as the potential for abuse is beyond my threshold of comfort.

(Tightening up my tinfoil wrap) It also makes me wonder (in a rhetorical way), whether this tool has already been used to proactively intercept communications of USCs CONUS... and how many companies like CyberPoint are out there working with friendly foreign governments and how often they accidentally (or not) end up with USCs in their targeting pool.
__________________
Freedom costs a Buck 0-5
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 9 January 2020, 15:08
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 20,715
The more time I spend in this world, and the more I learn about this shit, the spookier it gets.

Bottom line is unless you want to carry a dumb phone, you're vulnerable. Some more than others, obviously, but if it's a smart phone and it's turned on......You're vulnerable if they want to target you.
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 9 January 2020, 16:27
Macka's Avatar
Macka Macka is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharky View Post
The more time I spend in this world, and the more I learn about this shit, the spookier it gets.

Bottom line is unless you want to carry a dumb phone, you're vulnerable. Some more than others, obviously, but if it's a smart phone and it's turned on......You're vulnerable if they want to target you.
You could always go the Michael Bazzell route.

He practices privacy on steroids. His material was also an excellent resource for investigations.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000461477984
__________________
Freedom costs a Buck 0-5
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 9 January 2020, 17:02
CV's Avatar
CV CV is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 8,858
Everyone points to the phone manufacturers but no one raises hell with the telecommunication companies. That's where your shit is getting culled from.
__________________
It's a hipster filter. Keeps your kind out. -Jimbo
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 9 January 2020, 17:07
Macka's Avatar
Macka Macka is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by CV View Post
Everyone points to the phone manufacturers but no one raises hell with the telecommunication companies. That's where your shit is getting culled from.
In my opinion, securing the device is easy, especially since it is usually at your hip. The only issue is when it leave your control.

Your personal info is most at risk in transit. All cell providers sell your browsing info and other info. App users sell your info as well.

Stores and malls are collecting your wifi and bluetooth signals. I've taken to turning off bluetooth and wifi when I leave the house.

This NYT series (in their opinion section for some reason) is very informative.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...y-project.html
__________________
Freedom costs a Buck 0-5
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:16.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
SOCNET 1996-2020