[cryptome] Re: [cryptography] USG v. Apple, Apple Motion to Vacate Decrypt Order

  • From: douglas rankine <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:19:25 +0000

Hi coderman,
I don't know about that, but from what I have read so far it is very good... 415 pages of pure bliss. The thinking caps are on, the research is being done, the gathering of the evidence being collated and sorted and sifted and put in to some kind of order, the different arguments and counter-arguments correalated and prioritised. And all this learning going on. Philosophy, politics, science, culture, law, telecommunications, international ramifications, human rights, privacy of communications and last but not least, how important it all is; a bigger bite of the Apple and a lesser bit of the cherry in the international telecoms market, or a growth of even more and bigger Apples as every person and organisation wot loves unbreakable, end to end encryption throughout the world queques up for an unbitable Apple...:-) .

Apple's stuff on CALEA is very good, apparently their case says that as CALEA applies to them, then the All Writs Act doesn't in this case, because CALEA contains provisions which specifically doesn't bind APPLE to break its own code, or allow law enforcement officials to force it to change its own code for their purposes. I shall have more to say when i have read some more.
For those of you who have the time, I really recommend reading the long version. I find it most interesting and a very concentrated form of learning.

On 26/02/2016 01:54, coderman wrote:

On 2/25/16, John Young <jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
USG v. Apple, Apple Motion to Vacate Decrypt Order
... https://cryptome.org/2016/02/usg-apple-016.pdf
(415 pp, 19.5MB)

*this* is how you tell the FBI to Get Fucked, in legalese :P

Other related posts: