cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1874605

A 17-year-old from Nebraska and her mother are facing criminal charges including performing an illegal abortion and concealing a dead body after police obtained the pair’s private chat history from Facebook, court documents published by Motherboard show.

  • LeZero
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3672 years ago

    To the people shitting on the idea of a default defederation with Meta, how about we deferedate not because it will affect us as posters but because they are evil pieces of shit?

    • LemmyLefty
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      And even if what I do is relatively tame, I want others to be protected from the wolf at the door.

    • @WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      172 years ago

      Are you saying that the individuals who run these servers and instances aren’t subject to the same laws? I read the article, and Facebook complied with a court order.

      You don’t think anyone running Lemmy would do the same without access to lawyers and capital like Facebook has?

      • LeZero
        link
        fedilink
        English
        252 years ago

        Do you have to run your lemmy instance in the US?

        Maybe do it in a less backward place

        • @Brownboy13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          And how can we be sure that all the instances federated with any instance we participate on aren’t run by law enforcement themselves? I’d be surprised if there aren’t running instances by every major investigative agency themselves.

        • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -82 years ago

          Almost all countries have similar systems for obtaining evidence. These people were criminals, they broke the law and the legal system worked as designed to bring them to “justice”. Meta was just a pawn here with very little influence.

          If this story was about a murder rather than an abortion people would think that Meta did the right thing to bring the murderer to justice. As I see it the problem is that people disagree with the law and are using Meta as a scapegoat. But you don’t fix stupid laws by having corporations go vigilante. I’d rather not have billionaires coming up with their own set of laws, that is a recipe for disaster. I think we need to fix the laws, which will fix the root cause of this issue.

          Also use E2EE for all private information, cryptography can’t be compelled to reveal your private data by a court order.

          • LeZero
            link
            fedilink
            English
            132 years ago

            Do you think people who collaborated with dictatorial regimes should be excused? Because they followed the law?

            Why didnt Meta implant E2EE on their private chat service then?

            • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              72 years ago

              This is what I can agree with. We could blame Meta for encouraging people to give them data. Messenger does actually have E2EE encryption (apparently) but it is quite hidden and limited in functionality. If they made it the default this wouldn’t have been a position they ended up in, and they could have responded to the warrant with “We have no information matching this request.”

            • @platypus_plumba@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              Because they use what you say to tagert ads and keep a record of who you are. That’s how they make money.

              Which goes back to… You’re just a product. Stop using large platforms for personal shit. That’s their business model, how is it evil if most people know these companies rely on stealing as much information from you as they legally can AND they still use them.

      • @Arbiter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Complying with the law is less of an issue than keeping that data accessible in the first place.

      • @2MnyDcksOnThDncFlr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        I totally agree with your sentiment… However they don’t have a choice. They are legally obligated to turn that information over if they are served a warrant. Doing anything less is obstruction at the very least and they could be shut down and put into receivership.

        The fault here is with the two individuals trusting a corporation to keep data private and to put the individuals interests ahead of the corporation. Neither is a realistic expectation.

        • @triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          they could have made their shitty DM system end-to-end encrypt messages by default, instead of burying that feature[0] in chat settings

          or, they could have used their MASSIVE wealth and lobbying power to directly fight the warrant in court (if there even was one, they have a long history of just requiring a form ostensibly signed by any cop to turn over private data)

          or they could have just lied and said they couldn’t find the data

          I don’t disagree that people shouldn’t trust Facebook but saying “they don’t have a choice” is absurd

          [0] https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/786613221989782

    • @DrQuint@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      I vote to write this reasoning at the very top, on the sticked topics when it happens. Like, literally just write “Because Facebook is evil” and don’t elaborate.

      Plus, if someone shows up being a concern troll on the point, they will laser focus on it, taking the bait, we can all just block the person, a world improved.

    • @Telodzrum@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -12 years ago

      Any Lemmy instance would have given over the same information in this case. Meta was complying with a valid, legal search warrant.

      • link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        If some fuckstick from Nebraska asked me to snitch on my users for something which isn’t a crime in my state, I would simply tell them to fuck themselves, go ahead, and try to have me extradited. If my instance were bordering on a trillion dollars market cap, I’d hire a fucking lawyer.

  • @SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1002 years ago

    Just yesterday here on Lemmy, I mentioned the dangers of violating privacy, and some commenters went on about “what dangers?” Implying there were none…

    Is it not enough to gesture broadly?

    • @DrQuint@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      At this point, they’ll just say “yeah, but these people did a crime. I don’t do crimes so I have nothing to worry about”. The problem with that mentality, I would hope, doesn’t need to be stated.

      I stopped trying to change the world.

      • @HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        142 years ago

        This is the perfect example of why you should be worried. Because your government can turn into a fascist dictatorship at any time and you ain’t getting that data back.

      • @JakeHimself@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I agree with you, but I don’t think I could explicitly state what’s wrong with that mentality. Can you humor me and state it?

        Edit: can someone else take a shot at it? Tge parent comment is essentially saying “people will counter with X, but everyone knows that doesn’t make sense”. It’s clear that something is wrong with that mentality, but it obviously would have a very real benefit of stating it’s flaws since the whole premise of this is that some people don’t know what’s wrong with that mentality.

        • @Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          The obvious, unspoken part is: what is legal now isn’t guaranteed to be legal two seconds in the future, and likewise to what is illegal. The law gives you no guarantee of being ethical nor moral, it’s simply a collection of behaviors either sanctioned or unsanctioned by the State.

          As a clear example, you may tell me how much you love breathing in fresh air. If, tomorrow, breathing fresh air is made illegal, you’ve just shared with me a confession to a crime.

          • @JakeHimself@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Thank you for actually doing this.

            I guess that can also be extended to things that can accidentally be suspicious. Imagine if Colonel Mustard, who “doesn’t have anything to hide”, let the police search their trunk and found a broken candle stick. Even though he wasn’t being searched for that in particular, now he’s a suspect in Mrs. Peacock’s murder at the gazebo (Clue reference).

  • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    942 years ago

    People are getting all upset at Facebook/Meta here but they were served a valid warrant. I don’t think there is much to get mad about them here. The takeaway I get is this:

    Avoid giving data to others. No matter how trustworthy they are (not that Meta is) they can be legally compelled to release it. Trust only in cryptography.

    There is of course the other question of if abortion being illegal is a policy that most people agree with…but that is a whole different kettle of fish that I won’t get into here.

      • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        102 years ago

        Good luck with that. The way voting works in the US basically guarantees a 2-party race. With only 2 parties you end up having policies grouped into these huge bundles, so making an actual decision on any particular issue is incredibly difficult. (Unless you are a billionaire and want to lobby a party for a law)

    • @Steeve@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 years ago

      This is an older story, and 5 months later Meta announced that they’re rolling out full E2EE encryption to Messenger, I don’t think that’s a coincidence. Are they doing it out of the goodness of their hearts? Probably not, they’re a corporation, but this does show that global backlash actually works for something.

      Use end to end encrypted messaging apps, and, if you’re in a situation like this, know what they can be forced to share via court order. For example, while WhatsApp has full E2EE and messages can’t be turned over, IP addresses can, which can be used to track location, so don’t connect to an abortion clinic’s wifi for example. Probably just a good rule in general, as law enforcement could subpoena router logs if they have a suspicion.

      Ideally use something that can hand over less metadata like Signal if you’re in this sort of situation, they don’t even keep IP address, but this is a lesser known app that also relies on the recipient using Signal.

    • @Hexorg@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 years ago

      On one hand - yes Meta followed the legal requirement, but the bigger picture is that people always say “so what it’s <insert deficiency> just don’t do anything illegal”. But that’s only fine when legality matches morality. And the disparity has been growing lately.

      • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        aymar aru
        12 years ago

        I understand what you are saying but I don’t think that having every company coming up with their own definition of morality is the right solution. The only goal of these companies is to create profit, and I doubt that their definition of morality will be overall beneficial.

        • @Hexorg@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          aymar aru
          42 years ago

          Oh yeah I agree I didn’t mean it that way either. I just meant it as an argument for privacy/end to end encryption

    • Suze_McOoze
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      A valid warrant that was only possible to get information from because of Meta’s policy of “opt-in” for encrypted messages. They are still at fault imho

      • @Overtheveloper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        While whatsapp is using e2e encryption it is still owned by meta, as such I trust it just as much as plain facebook messenger. Signal ftw.

    • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      They are just complying with the law here. As much as I don’t think Meta are great people I’d rather that they follow the law than make their own decisions. Of course we should also consider fixing these laws, but that isn’t really Meta’s responsibility.

      • @Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        Law enforcement will knock on the doors of Fediverse servers and there will need to be some monetary fund for legal fees.

        • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          122 years ago

          If law enforcement knocks on my door with a valid warrant I’m going to comply. It would be nice to have some legal assistance to help validate the warrant but at the end of the day in this case it was almost certainly valid.

          If this was about a murder rather than abortion people would be applauding Meta for helping catch the murderer. I think what people are actually mad about is the law, and they are using Meta as a scapegoat.

          But at the end of the day E2EE is the best solution here. Don’t give private data to others, they can’t be trusted because they can be compelled by the law.

          • @phx@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 years ago

            And this is one thing that people don’t seem to understand about Lemmy et al. If you post messages (including DM’s) on any one host, that message will be duplicated to any federated hosts. In most cases the only encryption would be in transit, so all it takes is for one of those hosts to be in a jurisdiction where the local authorities can seize the data, hackers can infiltrate poorly secured server, etc

            If you are worried about the privacy/security of your data, it’s not really any safer here then on Reddit or Facebook etc. It may be more resistant to corporate influence but at the same time a kind citizen running a node is less likely to have money to fight legal action and warrants.

            • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              42 years ago

              Yes. You really should treat anything you post on Lemmy (or anywhere else that isn’t E2E Encrypted) as public.

              This is also why Lemmy recommends against using Lemmy direct messages and recommends Matrix with E2EE instead.

          • @drumstic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            For the murder example, remember Apple being in the news for not providing the FBI access via a backdoor in the OS to the San Bernardino shooter’s phone? There were plenty of people on both sides of that argument saying they should or shouldn’t comply. That’s why it’s essential for E2EE to maintain privacy

          • wanderingmagus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            02 years ago

            If the oberstgruppenfuhrer of the schutsstaffel came to your house and asked where the juden were hiding and had a valid order, would you show them the attic?

  • @ezmack@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    492 years ago

    Regardless of what you think about abortion laws people just gotta come to terms with the fact that your phone and computer are not reliable partners in crime

      • @ezmack@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        312 years ago

        I mean yeah it should but you gotta follow the old saying “don’t write when you can speak, don’t speak when you can nod, don’t nod if you can wink” or whatever. You have an expectation of privacy when sending physical mail for example, but it’s still a bad idea to put a crime in writing if you don’t have to. Even if it can’t legally be used as evidence it can be read. We’ve seen that with ‘parallel construction’ from law enforcement

  • @gapbetweenus@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    402 years ago

    If you have nothing to hide… but then they just change the laws, now you are a criminal and they already have handy tools in place to convict you.

      • @iviattendurefort@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        It’s kind of stupid to think that one side would use it and the other wouldn’t. Just because they aren’t destroying your privacy for this purpose doesn’t mean left leaning politicians wouldn’t use your data for their own clandestine reasons.

        • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          The right destroys privacy for either their control of the poors or for religious morality police.

          The left destroys privacy to root out fascism.

          They are not the same[.gif].

    • @Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      which prompted the state to issue Meta with a search warrant for their chat history and data including log-in timestamps and photos. Meta complied with the request

      They followed the law. Which they have to do.

      This is an issue primarily with the law. It’s not like Meta proactively shared that data.

      There’s huge issues with Meta. But they’re mostly beside the point here, and certainly not the problematic power at play here.

      Deflecting from law makers, courts, and prosecution to just Meta is misplaced and counter-productive.

      • @LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        If there were actually end to end encryption on the messages, they wouldnt have the ability to decrypt the messages for the government when asked. So either A. Meta lied about their encryption, or they are lying about storing users passwords which is arguably worse as many use passwords for multiple uses even when we know we shouldn’t. If Meta is required to not use encryption then once more I agree users should not use them for any personal messaging. Which is what it sounds people are preaching against here.

        • @Kissaki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          Was the form of private messages disclosed? Does meta claim end to end encryption on Facebook/Facebook messenger? That would be new to me.

          Having to provide back doors is another issue with the law/government and courts, not Meta or their power.

          IMO lying is not an issue of power as the commenter I replied to mentioned. They implied Meta was the perpetrator, the active part in all this. When in fact they either followed law or followed the law while being a shitty company. But they’re not the active part, the cause in this ordeal.

    • @zzz@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      this is pretty disgusting even for Facebook

      Not really. I mean, what did you expect from a company that’s responsible for manipulation of two major, major elections (one in the US and UK each) as well as a genocide in SEA?

      And that’s just what’s known publicly.

    • @PaulDevonUK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 years ago

      I can’t remember the last time I saw anything that made me think “I would like to go to America”.

      These days it’s just another thing to add to the ever increasing list of reasons NOT to go there.

      • @LuckyLu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        I live in a third world country with a crumbling infrastructure, shitloads of violence and crime, a rapidly rising cost of living, crap working opportunities and corrupt government.

        Americans live in a first world country where it seems more and more like most of the problems I mentioned are somehow worse there and the ones they haven’t got yet are on the horizon.

        I used to think it would be my future home. Now I’m looking for literally anything other than the US/China.

    • capital
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      What data do instances expose to Meta if they federate that Meta (or literally anyone) can’t obtain right now if they wanted?

  • @Thorgs@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    202 years ago

    Just deleted my Instagram Account for good. I have no need for any Meta App on my Phone or any other Stasi like Institution