What? This is not surprising. Post-September 11, 2001 our civil rights were thrown on the wayside in support of Dick Cheney's 'one-percent doctrine'.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Federal Law Enforcement Says It's Impossible to Wiretap iMessage Conversations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What? This is not surprising. Post-September 11, 2001 our civil rights were thrown on the wayside in support of Dick Cheney's 'one-percent doctrine'.
"Why would the Feds post a statement like this"
Did you actually read the article, it was a "sensitive" internal memo
Did you actually read the article, it was a "sensitive" internal memo
Yeah, if I wanted people to heed the information because it's easier for me to tap, I would probably say the same thing.
This is good to know
But seriously, shouldn't the "perpetrator" be subpoenaed or at least know that they're being tapped?
Seriously, I don't mean to sound rude but there is plenty of books and news articles that mention all the myriad of ways the U.S. government corrupted and threw our privacy rights post-September 11, 2001.
I am with you on privacy, but you will have a change of heart about "some of them getting away with crime" if God forbid you or a loved one happen to be one of the people affected by "some of them".
So there is one place where I don't have to talk as if I'm one of The Sopranos?
"Hey, we need to get that friend of ours to talk to that guy about that thing over at that place...."
"Hey, we need to get that friend of ours to talk to that guy about that thing over at that place...."
If someone, say, murders someone I know, exactly how is the criminal being brought to justice supposed to make me feel better? They have some fun in prison, they get out, and that's that. What do I gain exactly?
Not to mention this is the DEA. What do I care if a relative is smoking weed?
This is good to know
But seriously, shouldn't the "perpetrator" be subpoenaed or at least know that they're being tapped?
Errr... I am pretty sure wire taps don't work that way. You are not told "hey we are listening in" because, well, then you likely won't be saying any of the crap they are trying to hear you say...
I don't think they can afford very many iOS devices... plus I'm pretty sure NK is all talk with nothing to back themselves up. I think Kim Jong Un is just interested in seeing his name in global news. It's the only thing that explains why he always does his announcements at 4 AM their time - he's aiming to make announcements right on US news cycles to ensure his name is continually attached to "breaking news". He has no interest in having secure communications.
Bee Ess
If the feds truly can't "wiretap" iMessage, it's either due to incompetence, or they are flat-out lying through their collective teeth.
While the former is possible (after all, this is the same bunch that runs the Postal Service), I'm betting it's the latter. They have several buildings full of people that do nothing but decrypt messages... for a living.
If the feds truly can't "wiretap" iMessage, it's either due to incompetence, or they are flat-out lying through their collective teeth.
While the former is possible (after all, this is the same bunch that runs the Postal Service), I'm betting it's the latter. They have several buildings full of people that do nothing but decrypt messages... for a living.
You raise some important and valid points; however, I'm not sure if your comment was a response to the article or law enforcement in general. In the article it makes clear that iMessage data cannot be accessed even when court ordered by a judge. This isn't law enforcement eves dropping. It's them serving legal papers for law enforcement.
If it was truly 'sensitive', we wouldn't be reading about it here. It's a deliberate leak
like all leaks.
Word from the security community is that there isn't any encryption that can't be broken in a reasonable amount of time, nowadays. The government just doesn't want to work that hard. They demand backdoors to everything.
Anyone willing to pay for a private/secure internet? The way government and corporations think they own everything we do online, they should be providing internet access for all, for free.
If you think about it, all internet communications should be private, like the mail system, in the US constitution. Oh, that's right. The government is trying to bankrupt the Mail system, specifically to do away with privacy of communication. Right?