This Week In Techdirt History: July 3rd - 9th

Five Years Ago

The fight over PROTECT IP was heating up this week in 2011, with law professors joining the ranks of those opposed to the bill while Hollywood ramped up its smear campaign against Senator Ron Wyden, and Senator Jerry Moran removed himself as a co-sponsor of the bill. Of course, this wasn't the only bad bill being considered - there was also the anti-streaming bill, which caught the attention of video game streamers and was met with a mass of YouTube video protests. Meanwhile, the entertainment industry was busy moving ahead of the law by signing the major US ISPs onto a "five strikes" plan for copyright infringement. Those who received strikes would have to pay to contest them, and it looked like the industry had backdoored in the disconnection powers it so desired.

But the most memorable thing to happen this week in 2011 was, of course, the unveiling of the famous (and fascinating/contentious from a copyright perspective) monkey selfie.

Ten Years Ago

This week in 2006, the RIAA was busy suing sites around the globe, with the latest target being Allofmp3.com in the UK. We were skeptical of this approach, but the Associated Press certainly seemed to have bought the scare stories about global piracy in full. The RIAA was also failing on the home front, with university students seeing right through its terrible "free" music service. Hollywood was busy taking down the free promotion it got from its fans, and after a German magazine noted that you can technically pirate a movie by simply screencapping every frame, we wondered how long it would take for the MPAA to try to ban the Print Screen button.

There was a big, memorable moment this week in 2006 too: Senator Ted Stevens offered his infamous "series of tubes" explanation for the nature of the internet.

Fifteen Years Ago

Last week, we noted that Amazon introduced a free shipping program for the first time. This week in 2001, Barnes & Noble followed suit, and managed to do so without raising any prices on Monday. But then, on Friday... Amazon ended its free shipping program, calling it an experiment. Such was the dance of the early online retailers.

We saw the early rumblings of a legal response to the problems of cyber-bullying, and early takes on how to deal with (or possibly flat-out ban) the use of cellphones while driving. We even saw the earliest of baby steps down the long road to Uber with Ireland experimenting with the ability to get cabs by texting. And in a move that may not have seemed revolutionary at the time, but was actually a first step towards opening up lots of enlightening data, Google unveiled its "Zeitgeist" product for exploring the most popular searches and trends.

Twenty-Six Years Ago

Techdirt has been around for a long time, but the folks at the EFF still have a few years on us: it was on July 6th, 1990 that the EFF was founded by John Perry Barlow and Mitch Kapor after both faced inquiries by law enforcement agents who were clueless about technology. Happy birthday, EFF!

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

2015 Wiretap Report Doesn't Have Much To Say About Encryption, But Does Show Feds Run Into Zero Judicial Opposition

The US Courts' 2015 "Wiretap Report" is out and it seems to show that fears of "going dark" are largely overstated. Here's Alex Emmons of The Intercept:

Despite a 21 percent increase in wiretaps authorized by state courts overall between 2014 and 2015, the number of cases where law enforcement encountered encryption decreased from 22 to seven.

And out of 1,403 wiretaps authorized by federal judges, only six encountered encrypted communication. Two of those were decrypted by law enforcement, leaving only four that could not be deciphered.

[...]

That means that in 2015, out of 4,148 total wiretaps, only 11 encountered a form of encryption law enforcement could not break. That's about one quarter of one percent.

Not so fast. The lack of issues in this report doesn't necessarily mean law enforcement agencies aren't encountering encryption. It simply means they're not running into it while utilizing wiretaps. There's a lot this report doesn't cover and there are many instances where the chance of running into encryption that renders wiretaps useless is simply being avoided. Why do the paperwork if there's nothing to be acquired?

This is basically what the FBI told Motherboard in response to questions about the lack of encryption roadblocks shown in the report.

After this story was published, an FBI spokesperson echoed the arguments of Comey and Yates, saying the Wiretap Report numbers ”should not be surprising: agents now recognize when they are likely to encounter encryption and do not waste their time on fruitless endeavors.”

The FBI pointed to other reports more closely aligned with Comey's anti-encryption proselytizing.

The spokesperson added that ”a better representation” of the going dark problem is the number of devices that the Computer Analysis Response Team (CART) and Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory (RCFL), the FBI teams that help state and local police with technical requests, have been unable to unlock due to being encrypted.

”Over the 6-month period from October 1, 2015 – March 31, 2016, approximately 4,000 devices were submitted for digital forensic analysis. About 500 of those could not be unlocked,” FBI spokesperson Christopher Allen said.

Apples and oranges. But that's to be expected. One report deals with wiretap warrants obtained under one legal authority. The other deals with search warrants obtained under another. Wiretaps will rarely run into encryption because there are a wealth of options available to obtain communications that don't involve intercepting them... or more closely reflect the current reality of communications -- which isn't tied to plain old telephone service.

Whatever the government is doing with these other options can't easily be examined by the general public because there are no reporting requirements tied to these, unlike wiretap warrants. So, the number of times where encrypted communications (not contained in locked phones) are holding up law enforcement cannot be nailed down with any certainty. The DOJ could collect and disseminate this data, but it would certainly prefer to keep its reporting requirements to a minimum, even if this data would back up Comey's encryption histrionics.

What hasn't changed, however, is what wiretaps are used for: drugs. 3,367 or 4,148 issued in 2015 were for narcotics investigations. And for those of you who have followed the explosion of possibly illegal wiretaps originating from a single county courthouse in California, it's no surprise the state issuing the most federal wiretap orders is that particular coastal "drug corridor."

And, if law enforcement only ran into encryption in ¼ of 1% of wiretap orders, it ran into adversarial judges even less: every single one of the 4,148 federal wiretap requests was granted in 2015.

Taking James Comey at his word that encryption is a huge problem, it would appear the DOJ would rather withhold any data that supports this assertion than develop a precedent it doesn't like: additional reporting requirements on the ECPA orders, NSLs, and regular old search warrants it uses to obtain digital communications. Almost everything in this report deals with old-fashioned landlines, so its depiction of federal surveillance is woefully incomplete.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story