I think that's a very very dangerous idea for future privacy and freedom in the interconnected digital age of the future. Update is a Euphemism for eliminate. When everything is digital the only privacy for a individual will be the encryption of private thoughts or keeping those thoughts to just themselves. Thank goodness we still have Fifth Amendment rights here.

Just look at China for what a possible total surveillance digital society might look like with no password special protection.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/02/china-surveillance/552203/

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...to-australian-government-20191122-p53d1l.html

My last comment on this topic, I promise!

When everything is digital the only privacy for a individual will be the encryption of private thoughts or keeping those thoughts to just themselves. Thank goodness we still have Fifth Amendment rights here

I have two comments here. I recognize your purpose in citing the Fifth Amendment. But it is not a basis for refusing access. And the amendment does NOT apply in this case. Take a look at the Fourth Amendment, which specifically grants law enforcement access with a search warrant. You cannot legally deny access citing the Fifth Anendment, because the Fourth states that you MUST grant access.

Secondly, in previous posts in this discussion, the concept of “thoughts” or “private thoughts” are identified as protected. But, a word is not protected; an attribute is not protected. For by themselves, they do not constitute a “thought”. They are the mind’s equivalent to an object. As such, they are not “witness against yourself”. A password is not a “thought”.

Can you successfully argue that collection of a murder weapon is prohibited by the Fifth Amendment, because it’s collection may be self-incriminating? I believe not. As the collection of an attribute, a word, a token or a password is not self-incriminating.



The Fifth Amendment explicitly applies to testimony. Nothing else.

 

...
The Fifth Amendment explicitly applies to testimony. Nothing else.

More strawman arguments that totally bypasses current law on the subject of citizens Fifth Amendment rights superseding the government's Fourth Amendment powers on the subject of passwords as private thoughts.

Anything you say to law enforcement is testimony and can be used against you.

Lesson #1 don't talk to the police.

Don't trust the police.

 

More strawman arguments that totally bypasses current law on the subject of citizens Fifth Amendment rights superseding the government's Fourth Amendment powers on the subject of passwords as private thoughts.

Anything you say to law enforcement is testimony and can be used against you.

Lesson #1 don't talk to the police.

Ok, since you don’t accept private messages, I have to break my promise.

It’s very easy for you to accuse me of a straw man argument, since your position cannot be judged by itself. It omits important information conveniently. One can’t argue against a position which you believe is based on fallacies. It’s only your belief that portions of my argument are not on point is what makes this a straw argument. Perhaps, I could claim the same of your position, because you refer to the Fifth Amendment, and I’m talking about the Fourth.

My argument is a straw man argument, because the entire environment is not addressed by the entity making the argument. If one chooses to ignore the Fourth Amendment in preparing a dissenting position based on the Fifth Amendment AND then dismisses my viewpoint because I base it on the Fourth Amendment...

AND, then an argument is made based on something called “current law”? The law lives and breathes. And if current law is interpreted in this manner, then the courts ought to correct it and bring the law into the 21st century. Because Constitutional law does not support this interpretation of “current law”. I have already stated this. Did you miss my statement?

The problem as I see it, is that the inmates are running the asylum. Public interest is not served by narrow interpretations of prior art in the law, when a simpler (Occam’s Razor) approach would recognize that a cat is not a poem.

Do you really believe that the Constitution Amendment’s were really intended to allow criminals, spies, buggers and thieves to be protected? I propose that the law intended to protect innocent citizens. As a loyal patriotic citizen, I have nothing to fear. If there is something in my home, in a safe deposit box or my computer/smart devices that I think needs protection from the law - I propose that the likelihood of it being illegal is high.

My United States is not a country to be feared. Even if anomalies exist, I trust OUR system of justice to be able to eventually correct them. If the land that I love turns against me, it is my right to fight back or leave if necessary.

But I sincerely doubt that would happen. I personally cannot imagine living in paranoid fear. But that’s just me.

 

At the beginning of Georgia's Statehood Lawyers were banned from the State. It didn't take lawyers very long to correct what they considered to be a personal insult.

 

Do you really believe that the Constitution Amendment’s were really intended to allow criminals, spies, buggers and thieves to be protected? I propose that the law intended to protect innocent citizens.

They were intended to protect its citizens, unqualified by any notion of innocence or guilt. That's the entire point of presumed innocence. The founders well-recognized that the only way for a government to truly protect the rights of the innocent is to treat everyone as if they were innocent.

As a loyal patriotic citizen, I have nothing to fear. If there is something in my home, in a safe deposit box or my computer/smart devices that I think needs protection from the law - I propose that the likelihood of it being illegal is high.

I find it odd that you associate privacy with wanting to hide something nefarious. I am truly confident that 100% of my emails, phone conversations, and the contents of my medicine cabinets are perfectly legal and pose no threat to the U.S. government or its citizenry. I also strongly believe that said emails, conversations, and contents are 100% none of the government's business. This is a fundamental governing principle. I do not care one bit if an FBI agent happens to overhear my conversation with my wife while we're at dinner; it is an entirely different matter if the FBI is bugging my phone. The principle has been violated in the latter, but not former, case.

It is not that the content of our messages or cabinets must be protected; it is that the government's scope of power must be limited. That is the principle. Those who would corrupt that principle in the name of "increased security" invite a government that is itself corrupt. The founding fathers knew this.

 

My United States is not a country to be feared. Even if anomalies exist, I trust OUR system of justice to be able to eventually correct them. If the land that I love turns against me, it is my right to fight back or leave if necessary.

But I sincerely doubt that would happen. I personally cannot imagine living in paranoid fear. But that’s just me.

That's because you haven't lived in the other America for your entire life. I don't blame you or your experience but you have no real-life experience living on the other side of the railroad tracks for the last 70 years. It's not paranoia to have the default position that the 'government' and their 'agents' are not your friends and benefactors.

 

I think I may have posted here about the Judge lambasting a State Trooper for using the all too often heard in court "I detected an odor of marijuana" as grounds for searching the vehicle. The local constabulary is far less corrupt than it was 40 years ago but still likes to count coup in any way they can, even by distorting the truth or outright lying/Perjury in court. And 99% of the time their lies in court are taken as prima facia evidence and indisputable.

 

I think I may have posted here about the Judge lambasting a State Trooper for using the all too often heard in court "I detected an odor of marijuana" as grounds for searching the vehicle. The local constabulary is far less corrupt than it was 40 years ago but still likes to count coup in any way they can, even by distorting the truth or outright lying/Perjury in court. And 99% of the time their lies in court are taken as prima facia evidence and indisputable.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/c...0191125-5ea5smhvpzenfpyqkismdgla74-story.html

Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby said Monday the detective and prosecutor in 1983 coached and coerced the testimony of the four students. Her prosecutors appeared Monday afternoon in Baltimore Circuit Court to ask a judge to throw out the three convictions.
“Present day, all four of those witnesses have recanted,” Assistant State’s Attorney Lauren Lipscomb told the judge. “There is evidence of coerced pretrial preparation ... One former student told the state that they were told quote ‘Get with the program.’”

 

That's because you haven't lived in the other America for your entire life. I don't blame you or your experience but you have no real-life experience living on the other side of the railroad tracks for the last 70 years. It's not paranoia to have the default position that the 'government' and their 'agents' are not your friends and benefactors.

Wow, I didn’t think there was “another America”! That is such an anti-American concept. Perhaps that is my naïveté

I know some people do fear the ‘government’ and its ‘agents’. But I have yet to be given proof that there is cause for such fears. I could be wrong and welcome the opportunity to learn where this fear comes from.

I see people blaming the ‘government’ and it’s ‘agents’ as a matter of covering their behaviors that they should be arrested for.

AND I see others identifying with criminals who by association are fearful as well.

This is the payment for a society that believes in “innocent until proven guilty”. Those who do not deserve the benefits of our society, are excused long enough to be raised to the level of martyrs. And association with these individuals are a blight on the Democracy.

So I agree with you, while disagreeing. In principle, how can I disagree? In practice, how can you disagree? As long as our society leaves a loophole for the criminal to be rewarded, I will fight for the closing of this loophole.

For the future, I don’t see things changing, until the electorate grows brave enough to stifle those who abuse their position, to allow the minority to abuse hee we majority.

I am hopeful. I’ve seen this played out befi

 

Wow, I didn’t think there was “another America”! That is such an anti-American concept. Perhaps that is my naïveté

I know some people do fear the ‘government’ and its ‘agents’. But I have yet to be given proof that there is cause for such fears. I could be wrong and welcome the opportunity to learn where this fear comes from.

Anti-American concept? It's as American as Apple Pie.

Look at the story I just posted above in this thread for an idea of why. Government power is the ability to make lies the truth since 1983 for those poor people.

 

DJ Here in GA you have to right to go before the judge to contest any traffic ticket. It is a waste of time because the officer will invariably lie his ass off in order to validate his ticketing. IE He was driving over the speed limit when in fact he wasn't. When he asked to see the radar gun output reading on the roadside during the stop the officer told him it was illegal for him to do so. I don't worry about breaking the law because I don't, but I also don't like being falsely accused, ticketed, lied to in court by a sworn officer of the court and assessed a fine plus court costs to pay immediately in cash or go straight to jail for something I was falsely accused of. And I'm the guy the Sherrif told "We need more honest people like you" when I turned in a lost wallet containing $500 to their office.

 

Wow, I am so sorry you live in Georgia. If the officer said it was illegal for him to provide the radar gun readings, the case would be immediately thrown out of court here. No questions asked. If the only proof was the officer’s word, forget about it! The case is thrown out of court. I guess I don’t understand why other states allow such behavior.

 

He lied and told the judge he said no such thing and told him I was more than 10mph over the speed limit. LOL Look up Ludowici, the governor put up billboards warning travelers it was a speed trap back in the 50's before I-95 when it was a main route to FL. https://www.bing.com/search?q=ludowici+ga+speed+trap&FORM=QSRE8 And that was long before the ticket in the early 2000s. I know and have been friends with lots of folks in Law Enforcement but they get a we vs. them mentality at work. There is still lots of room for improvement in public service and it doesn't always attract the best and brightest employees.

 

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/portland/news/press-releases/tech-tuesdaysmart-tvs
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/fiel...-releases/tech-tuesday-internet-of-things-iot

Remember BIG BROTHER is Watching out for YOU!

 

https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-plundervolt-attack-impacts-intel-cpus/

Academics from three universities across Europe have disclosed today a new attack that impacts the integrity of data stored inside Intel SGX, a highly-secured area of Intel CPUs.

The attack, which researchers have named Plundervolt, exploits the interface through which an operating system can control an Intel processor's voltage and frequency -- the same interface that allows gamers to overclock their CPUs.

That's an old trick that was used to hack satellite TV systems years ago.

 

Odd because Intel chips quit having that function years ago??? Check out wikichip...

 

Odd because Intel chips quit having that function years ago??? Check out wikichip...

What function? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Guard_Extensions

A Intel cpu firmware update for this issue has already been released for my systems running Debian SID.

 

As an example... Except for some "extreme editions" primarily made for top-end machines...
Unless it is a way to get around the locking.

locked clock multiplier

Core i7-1060G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-1065G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-1068G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2535QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2570QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2610UE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2617M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2620M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2627M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2629M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2630QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2635QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2637M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2640M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2649M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2655LE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2655QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2657M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2660M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2667M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2669M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2670QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2675QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2677M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2685QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2689M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2710QE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2715QE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2720QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2740QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2760QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2820QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2840QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2860QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2920XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-2960XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3770K - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3920XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3940XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3970X Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-4750HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4760HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4770HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4770R - Intel +	true +

 

As an example... Except for some "extreme editions" primarily made for top-end machines...
locked clock

Core i7-1060G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-1065G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-1068G7 - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2535QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2570QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2610UE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2617M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2620M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2627M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2629M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2630QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2635QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2637M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2640M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2649M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2655LE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2655QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2657M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2660M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2667M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2669M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2670QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2675QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2677M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2685QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2689M - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2710QE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2715QE - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2720QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2740QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2760QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2820QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2840QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2860QM - Intel +	true +
Core i7-2920XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-2960XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3770K - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3920XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3940XM Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-3970X Extreme Edition - Intel +	false +
Core i7-4750HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4760HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4770HQ - Intel +	true +
Core i7-4770R - Intel +	true +

I wasn't talking about overclocking (a dumb thing to do on a server type machine), my point was about attacking the security enclave Intel SGX. The old SAT hack was to overvolt glitch security modules

 

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/z3bbq4/podcast-livestreams-hacked-ring-cameras-nulledcast

In the NulledCast hackers livestream the harassment of Ring camera owners after accessing their devices. Hundreds of people can listen.