Good thing, or bad thing?

[The Annoyed Man]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html
FBI blasts Apple, Google for locking police out of phones

FBI Director James B. Comey sharply criticized Apple and Google on Thursday for developing forms of smartphone encryption so secure that law enforcement officials cannot easily gain access to information stored on the devices — even when they have valid search warrants.

His comments were the most forceful yet from a top government official but echo a chorus of denunciation from law enforcement officials nationwide. Police have said that the ability to search photos, messages and Web histories on smartphones is essential to solving a range of serious crimes, including murder, child pornography and attempted terrorist attacks.

“There will come a day when it will matter a great deal to the lives of people . . . that we will be able to gain access” to such devices, Comey told reporters in a briefing. “I want to have that conversation [with companies responsible] before that day comes.”

What say ye worthies?

[C-dub]

But I don't want to pick just one!

[RoyGBiv]

Very good thing.

1. The encryption does not prevent tracking. You can still find the bad guy.
2. Once you find the bad guy, you can serve them your warrant and search the phone when it's in your hand.
3. Encryption only prevents access to content. The phone company (and therefore LE) still has access to the metadata. Who did you call/text, when, for how long. Accomplices can therefore be uncovered, traced, etc.

Where can I get this encryption software? Maybe I should read the article?

[cb1000rider]

The government created the need for these. If the government was just snooping on bad guys and not bending the rules, there would be no market for such devices. This one is self-inflicted.

Note, there may be other reasons why black phones should be used.. It may not just be our government, but other entities... Some speculate that these are foreign:
http://blackbag.gawker.com/rogue-interc ... 1630079351" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


That's my tin-foil hat for the week..

[The Annoyed Man]

The government created the need for these. If the government was just snooping on bad guys and not bending the rules, there would be no market for such devices. This one is self-inflicted.

Note, there may be other reasons why black phones should be used.. It may not just be our government, but other entities... Some speculate that these are foreign:
http://blackbag.gawker.com/rogue-interc ... 1630079351" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


That's my tin-foil hat for the week..

That's a good point. I hadn't thought of the illicit cell towers. If the encryption keeps me safe from those, I'm for it. And like Roy said, if law enforcement can get everything they need to catch me without invading my privacy, then let them do it. They can always access the phone once they actually have it in their hands.

[talltex]

I vote yes. I know that it may hinder SOME investigations, but for the most part, it simply requires them to use the same procedures as in the past to obtain certain information. However, I believe that currently, the pendulum has swung way too far toward unwarranted invasive use of technology. Until recently, Law Enforcement agencies operated without ANY access to our private communications at all...with the exception of a court authorized "wire tap". Even though they had the ability to tap a phone line, they couldn't just go out and do it without a request for a court order that gave specific reasons why it was deemed necessary in that case. Never before did they have access to electronic messages (text, email and pictures) and verbal communications. (NSA sworn testimony: we have never recorded phone calls and collected data on anyone without a warrant. OOPS! A week later: well, ok...actually, yes we have...all of it). The fact that all of that personal information is easily available to them now without encryption, doesn't mean that they should have a "right" to access it. In my opinion, it should be treated the same as any other privileged information, and they should only be able to look at it if they can present adequate specific information to a Judge to justify the invasion of privacy with a legal search warrant.

[Pawpaw]

I'm for anything and everything that will help keep the government the HECK out of my business!

[CHLLady]

I voted YES! The gov. Has shown they can't be trusted. They can't find Lois Lerners emails? Then what's the point of mass collecting? Who is using it and why? Nope, they will have plenty of other ways to catch bad guys.

[lfinsr]

This is only new for the Apple folks. Android phones, at least the ones I've used, have had encryption for a long time. The change is that it will be the default configuration on IOS8 and the upcoming Android release. We have 2 choices; 1)Secure everything and nobody can snoop or 2)Status quo where everyone is a potential victim. I'm tired of option 2...

[Dragonfighter]

With all of the Facebooked, Twits and Instagrammed; there is a good deal of self surveillance. But our government isn't satisfied with that. They want unfettered access to our most private lives without that cumbersome Constitution getting in the way.

[Dadtodabone]

I'm a yes vote. The government is not your friend.

[jmra]

I'm a yes vote. The government is not your friend.

[The Annoyed Man]

I'm actually interested that there are 2 votes against, but no posts to defend that position. How can that be?

[mojo84]

I voted bad as I think the cops should be able to access the phone if a properly issued search warrant is rwceived, not just a rubber stamp search warrant. Without a search warrant, they shouldn't be able to access the phone whether encrypted or not.