Opinion Warrant-proof encrypted devices hinder law enforcement - Please let us backdoor your devices under the guise of protecting children


Eugene Kowel
March 28, 2024 3:00 am


On any given day, FBI agents, task force officers, analysts and mission support staff across Nebraska and Iowa respond to and investigate bank robberies, cyber intrusions, human trafficking, terrorism threats, civil rights violations, crimes against children, hostile intelligence activities, public corruption, bomb threats, drug trafficking, gang violence or other crimes.

Although these threats can strike our community in vastly disparate ways, our goal is always the same — to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution. And there is one factor in common to almost every case we investigate: our critical need to obtain digital and electronic evidence to mitigate threats, protect victims and apprehend criminals.

The digital environment has changed the way we conduct our investigations. Today the average FBI subject has an exponentially greater array of places where evidence can be stored than a subject 30 years ago. In addition to physical locations and vehicles, subjects often possess smartphones, computers, tablets, cameras, email and social media accounts, internet phone numbers and cloud storage.

Over our 115-year history, the FBI has always adapted to change with innovative ideas to protect lives, bring bad actors to justice and combat newly emerging threats. We continue to do that to this day. Innovation is one of FBI Director Christopher Wray’s key strategic pillars, and the FBI continues to develop cutting-edge, world-class tools.

However, law enforcement in our country is facing another challenge quickly increasing in magnitude: that even once we identify where critical evidence is located, and go to a judge, and obtain a court-authorized search warrant, we still might not be able to obtain the digital evidence we need. Encryption can prevent us from accessing information locked inside a device or managed by a service provider.

Criminals in Nebraska and Iowa are increasingly able to use warrant-proof encrypted devices and communication services to hinder law enforcement. This challenge affects all our state, local, federal and tribal law enforcement partners, impeding our ability to protect our community.

When it is necessary to obtain authority from a judge to intercept communications in real time to disrupt gang violence, organized crime, drug trafficking, public corruption, or other conspiratorial activity, bad actors are no longer limited to land lines and cellular phones. There now exist a multitude of encrypted communication platforms and digital devices subjects can use to perpetrate and communicate about criminal activity out of the reach of law enforcement.

Last year FBI Omaha put over 70 child predators behind bars. Our mission to identify, locate and recover child victims and bring predators to justice will remain one of our highest priorities in 2024. However, our declining access to digital evidence is coming at a time when online child sexual exploitation and abuse is at an all-time high.

Two months ago, FBI Omaha led law enforcement teams across Nebraska to arrest 29 individuals on federal and state drug trafficking and firearms charges. We apprehended subjects in Lincoln, Kearney, Ogallala, North Platte, McCook, Brule, Sutherland and several other communities. In another drug trafficking case in the Omaha-Council Bluffs area, we worked with our partners to arrest, indict, convict and sentence 11 individuals responsible for distributing 500-1,000 fentanyl pills a day in Omaha and Council Bluffs. Six drug deaths were attributed to this network. In both these cases we relied heavily on lawful, court-authorized access to digital evidence. Our declining access to digital evidence comes at a time when drug trafficking has proliferated on online platforms.

Effective detection and deterrence of criminal activity like crimes against children, drug trafficking and terrorism on online platforms requires platform owners to develop lawful access capabilities, so that once a crime occurs, law enforcement can bring the perpetrators to account and provide justice for victims.

As a society, it’s imperative law enforcement retains the ability to obtain lawful access to evidence when it is needed to investigate and prosecute criminal activity by going before a judge, presenting facts of our investigation and asking for a search warrant. Law enforcement is simply seeking the same constitutional framework and protections in today’s digital spaces as we’ve had for decades with telephone records, banking, financial payments, health care and other areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

We want to work with the private sector to find a solution, allowing us to lawfully access the evidence we need to protect our communities while maintaining strong security and privacy for consumers’ communications and information. The FBI remains a strong advocate for both cybersecurity and responsibly managed encryption – encryption that can be reliably decrypted when served with a lawful order.

Criminals cannot be allowed to hide evidence behind an essentially impenetrable digital lock box. If they do, victims will be denied justice, crimes will go unsolved and those who break the law will remain free.
 
Fuck off glowie jorno scumbag.

Easier access doesn't just mean feds or cops. It means people with malicious desires can also use this retarded backdoor to gain access as well.

I don't buy a gun safe with a digital lock that someone else has a master code to for the same reason I don't buy a device with a backdoor anyone can access.
 
Eugene Kowel joined the FBI as a special agent in 2005. He now serves as the special agent in charge of the FBI’s Omaha field office, which covers Iowa and Nebraska.
It occurs to me, if a political party made strong crypto part of its platform, little screeds like these would be Hatch Act violations. Have any political parties or candidates for Federal or Nebraska office said anything about cryptography recently?
 
It occurs to me, if a political party made strong crypto part of its platform, little screeds like these would be Hatch Act violations. Have any political parties or candidates for Federal or Nebraska office said anything about cryptography recently?
LMAO, after what happened between 2016, and 2020 the Hatch Act is a dead letter.
 
Just a reminder, never EVER use faceid or biometrics of any kind.
thug feds will force you to open it via manhandling if you do. (They did this to John Eastman, in an ambush on the street, and in violation of a federal court order to the contrary. Once it was open the damage could not be undone)
Always a pass code.
 
Last edited:
Good. I'll encrypt the encryptions of my encrypted backups until it's a matryoska of encryption you can't decrypt, glowniggers. And all that will be on that drive in the event you do decrypt it is 2TB of goatsee, repeated over and over, with the occasional Terry Davis "you can see them glow in the dark" clip thrown in.
 
Never give the Feds access to your devices. Because what tends to happen is that they'll stuff it with enough illegal content to give you a one-way trip to Pee-Pee-Poo-Poo Rape dungeon unless you take their deal and work for the Feds.
Oh yeah, planting cheese pizza on journos was Obama's favorite method of disappearing them.
Every time someone was investigating his corruption he'd suddenly be sent to prison for pedophilia. It's just magical.
 
– encryption that can be reliably decrypted when served with a lawful order.
So the opposite of encryption?
1000001845.jpg
Fuck your warrant and the Five Eyes monstrosity you rode in on.
 
This actually relates to something that shows up in true crime stuff on youtube a lot, usually relating to teens going missing. Its either the cops/parents/youtuber complaining about encrypted message apps or the like, and wanting the companies to either somehow decrypt it (they won't, or literally can't) or to remove that privacy for the sake of muh keedz.

No, the point is that there should be shit the gov can't get their grubby fingers on. Fuck off and maybe parent your kids or avoid situations where you need to pry into people's shit.
 
God forbid the police have to actually investigate something instead of flipping a rat or using phone info.
They had a golden era between the introduction of smartphones and the Snowden leaks, where everyone was putting everything on devices or in the cloud with near-zero cognizance of the privacy implications. Now things have gotten slightly more difficult again, and they are whining about how their job is a tiny bit more difficult than in 2012 (but still way easier than say, 1992).
 
Fuck off glowie jorno scumbag.

Easier access doesn't just mean feds or cops. It means people with malicious desires can also use this retarded backdoor to gain access as well.

I don't buy a gun safe with a digital lock that someone else has a master code to for the same reason I don't buy a device with a backdoor anyone can access.
If every stolen phone was useless, there would be no stolen phones.
 
it's getting more and more difficult, but i refuse to purchase anything that requires biometrics or remote access.
not because i'm doing anything wrong, but because any organization that requires it is doing something wrong.
 
Back