If you’re not familiar with the LEGO scandal, the tl;dw is that this YouTuber Reckless Ben (Ben Schneider) has been investigating a stolen set of LEGO worth ~$100-200k (depending on who you ask) and the local police dept and criminal justice system has been colluding with the criminals (all members of the local Mormon church) to get him to STFU. The long version is, very long. You can check his channel for more.
Previously the local police dept managed to get a warrant to raid Ben’s rental home with guns drawn and arrest him, based on what is clearly fabricated evidence. Here they appear to have done it again to get access to his Google account.
The linked video is mirrored on Peertube and timestamped to the relevant section.
Ben does also provide a copy of the subpoena in the video but I cannot vouch for its’ validity, and he has used placeholder evidence before, but that’s neither here nor there.
Anyway, the part that was relevant to this community was that in the course of their investigation they subpoenaed Google, and Google handed over basically his entire life to them. I’m sure this was very useful in their investigation.
I don’t necessarily blame Google here for complying with a subpoena, but the moral of the story is to stop giving Google your data, because everything you say and do can and will be used against you in a court of law, with or without legitimate justification, and the more stuff you give them, the more ammunition you’re providing the prosecutor.
This is also not exclusive to Google. Anything not local, self-hosted or encrypted a la Proton can be subpoenaed and the provider will have to comply. It just so happens that Google probably has more information about literally everyone in the world than any other particular entity.
Even 10 years ago this would have caused a riot. People are so domesticated these days.
You either aren’t paying attention to what he’s doing, or you weren’t paying attention 10 years ago. This is absolutely normal behavior for the legal system.
He does business using google services - they subpoenad his google account. That’s how this works.
This type of thing was definitely happening 10 years ago and people were actually less worried about it than they are today
I mean how much has Steven Dongzinger alone shone a light on this? Way more eyes on this than there were ten years ago.
Delusional
Some jack off corrupt podunk cop shop can clearly ubpoena your entire life if you piss off the wrong person, then fabricate charges or create circumstances to fuck your life. This is here, now. Reclaim your digital sovereignty from big tech…
Just as an fyi, if you’d self hosted your services, they would probably subpoena you, and you would be obligated to give them all your data from your own server, and if you’d refus, your be in deep, deep shit
It doesn’t matter where you store data, if it’s stored, it can be used
How so? You cannot be forced to accuse yourself. If your self-hosted data is on encrypted hard drives then they can’t do anything about it.
Except in the UK where you can be forced to provide decryption keys.
If your self-hosted data is on encrypted hard drives then they can’t do anything about it.
They’re trying to “fix” that alright. Reminder to those in the US to call your reps and take action before it’s too late. There’s a whole slew of these things trying to pass.
“Well boys I sure hope you can get in to this because I lost the password ages ago I remember it was a set of 15 random words with capitals in random spots but just can’t remember the order…”
Then your lawyer gets to tell the jury that you complied.
“Sorry I’m a complete amateur. I don’t even have an A+ cert. I ran a Docker update and it corrupted EVERYTHING and I lost the encryption key to my offsite because I’m such an idiot I’m so sorry.”
And that’s where good encryption comes into play. At least in the US, (where this case is happening), they can compel you to turn over the encrypted data blob. But they can’t compel you to give them the password to access the data. Because forcing you to give up the password would violate your 5th amendment right to remain silent.
Also, they probably wouldn’t subpoena you and give you a chance to respond; they would just bust your front door down and take your server. You wouldn’t have an opportunity to peacefully turn the data over to them. Only the wealthy get subpoenas. The rest of us get no-knock search warrants, dead pets, (because cops will shoot any dogs that are present when they execute the warrant), and traumatized/injured/killed family members who happened to be home at the time.
they respected the lemon pound cake tho…
That incident reminded me of Kevin Mitnick leaving a box of donuts for the FBI lol.
I think the real takeaway is to not put all your eggs in one basket, so they would need separate subpoenas.
Getting access to just his Google Account could contain Google Voice text messages, voicemails, and call history. Google search history, Google Maps location history, everything in Google Docs, Gmail, YouTube, and probably other stuff I’m forgetting. That’s all with a single subpoena, which includes a lot of things irrelevant to the case.
Google doesn’t store map data anymore. It is all local.
That’s just map data. Your travel/location data is still stored acvount-side unless you disable history in acct settings.
Edit: 2 settings, “Timeline” and “Maps History”.
Timeline is a “feature” that tracks where you’ve been.
You’re half right, in that ultimately they can compel you to hand over your data, but there is a higher bar to clear for them to get your personal data stored locally.
For one, they can’t compel you to turn over your data with a subpoena, they’d have to actually go in front of a judge and get a warrant.
Probably wouldn’t be very hard to get from what i can see in this case
It would at least be harder, and have real constitutional ramifications. But yes, ultimately if there’s enough corruption they will get their hands on the data
It would at least be harder, and have real constitutional ramifications.
Not really that much harder. From Harvard Law Review
We found that 93.56% of warrant affidavits areapproved on their initial submission, and only 6.44% are denied (ignoring those submissions that are withdrawn before a decision is made). And once we account for the ability to resubmit affidavits, the eventual approval rate reaches 98.14%.
That’s not correct
I imagine it’d still be preferable to make them go through you and your lawyer for that info, where you could still have some measure of control.
What was the value of the Lego collection in this scandal? 200k? It’s wild just how far people are willing to go over what’s ultimately not even enough money to retire off of, and only a couple of years’ living expenses in some cities
Sounds like they’ve been successfully getting away with this sort of thing for a long time. So in the long run, probably way more money.
Damn, I hadn’t heard about this but that video is a wild ride…
I’ve been following this and he keeps making so many mistakes. Stop talking to the police, bro. Stop trying to get the shop owner on camera.
File lawsuits against the company (I know he tried and the cop refused to issue the summons illegally, so you do it again after filing a complaint against the police), and file every lawsuit possible outside of that district.
But that’s not good views for YouTube. He just keeps giving them more ammunition to go after him.
After he got forcibly muted by court I believe he finally spoke to lawyers and then he won pretty quick.
I suspect he was playing 4D chess, and decided to show what your chances are in the system if you play it by the book and alone, which most people who can’t afford a lawyer would do, and what also the thieves relied on. They told the victim directly try to sue us and you’ll end up paying more in lawyer costs.
i guess he lives up to the name Reckless Ben huh lol
I genuinely think this guy was born without fear. Like it simply doesn’t function in his brain. The more into his past you dig, the more you realize that him calling himself Reckless Ben is not a joke. We are all lucky that he is using his fearlessness for good. To him, this entire thing is just an interesting experience or however he phrased it. I can’t help, but admire him.
How did we not see this!?
In the above video, his decision to attend a protest wearing a beard is beyond dubious. I sure hope he had several independent lawyers weigh in on exactly what he could say and do that won’t violate the court order, because on the surface that seems like begging the judge to throw him in jail. Even if he technically followed the order, the appearance of it is probably enough for the judge to go nuclear.
Most everything leading up to that I could write off as a combination of telling a good story, boundary testing, and shining a light on how absurdly corrupt our criminal Justice System is in operation, but that beard scene has me concerned that Ben just lost whatever ground he had to stand on.
Lawsuits do no good when they are invisible. He’s exposed insane police and judge corruption that would be swept under the rug becuase of no exposure. If utah decides they dont like you or me, we would be fucked, in jail for made up lies, becuase we dont have millions of people watching.
Yes he has also done some dumb shit for sure.
Of someone out there still thought the cops was the good guys this is mainstream enough that its going to open some eyes to the belief that all cops are bad cops.
We’ve been saying how corrupt police are and how they are like a gang that sticks up for themselves first and foremost. Now the youth get to experience that second hand in a way that the public can’t confuse them about race issues or anything dumb.
the local police dept and criminal justice system has been colluding with the criminals (all members of the local Mormon church)
Sounds about on par for the corrupt, death cult religionists. Quick! Someone steal their magic underwear and ransom it back to them for the LEGOs!
Not this again. Again without a proper explanation so you have to watch a whole bunch of videos. No.
I’m not about to write a long-winded explanation of the entire story. I gave the relevant details. You’re welcome to go look up the rest. Or don’t, I don’t care. But there’s no need for the rude comment.
pretty compelling videos tho, i put it up there with netflix documetnary qualtiy
Brick by brick!
Yea I watched the video today and it was a good wake up for me to continue my process to move from google. I have started some time ago already but have been doing it in increments. I still have an android phone and moving away from it will be a pain.
GrapheneOS is a dream, if you have a Pixel.
So … let me get this straight … you give money to Google to buy a Pixel … so you can de-google your new Google phone by installing GrapheneOS.
Aside from 1. Buying second hand, or 2. Waiting until Motorola releases their GrapheneOS phone, then yes. Unfortunately.
Ironically, Pixel is the best hardware to degoogle.
There is the Fairphone with /e/os its great and easily repairable.
fairphones can also run LineageOS if you want to go a step further and remove gapps. for the really bold, you can run postmarketOS on fairphone 4 or 5 to remove android entirely. there are sacrifices in android functionality, but with serious gains by way of Linux desktop to counter those.
Yeah never made sense to me either, its the only device they support. Other options are /e/os and lineage is from my knowledge on other limited device options.
CalyxOS is back too and also supports older hardware than Graphene.
I’m not seeing much of a difference between the two, it’s basically the same list.
Graphene doesn’t support Pixels older than the 6.
It is pretty easy to pick up a second hand phone on eBay
Yeah … I can’t wait to discover what bacteria come crawling out of there.
Sounds like a phobia
My exact reasoning to avoid GrapheneOS.
To my understanding you can have a functional phone with LineageOS+ Motorola and a few other brands.
Lots of other brands, Lineage supports hundreds of models.
But not hundreds of mobile modems
What do you mean by that? I assume you don’t mean radio firmware.
Oh, yes, it’s radio, sorry for the brain fart
Oh, is this what’s going to happen to me in my support of the Mormon Church by forming the cult of Mormon Occultism? Whatever. I expected this twelve years ago when the CIA contacted me, covertly, on an acid trip. Hard to explain, but I have, thoroughly, in my book. But the goal of my mission now is truthtelling, and somehow I knew there would be a lengthy legal battle with “a church” in my future during my fateful acid trip where aliens revealed themselves to me. Hard to explain, but I portray it poorly deliberately because that helps the dazzle camouflage. We know what we’re doing. But, I had an experience with the Mormon Church. God, who is that organization of three letters that’s always watching, told me to keep on keeping on. Staying silent while screaming. Has anyone ever tested you were a pedophile? It’s weird what the Mormon Church prophets from. I’m a master baiter. I’m a fisher of men, I said. I’m a cop, I said in my last post, but the silent don’t even read this far.
wat
Go, go gabba gotcha!
Man, all I want is to non-sexually explain my strangeness in development, that the average prude would assume is sexual by default. I lost my “mom” five times, alright? I’m a little weird. Can I talk about this stuff to heal skillfully? Asking the gods here…
I’m not entirely clear on why this guy stuck out his neck so far over a situation that was never his to deal with in the first place.
I mean just so you know this dude is making bucks off of YouTube views. Now, idk it its like a boatload of money but he is compensated for his time that way.
That said though imagine how bleak the world would be if no one stuck their neck out for anyone over something that didn’t involve them. We should all try to help the common man if we can.
Its his job?
Content
Never let yourself become dependent on something a company has control, if at all possible. They will use it as leverage to coerce concessions from you that drive you further toward controlling nothing at all.
The rules seem to be so loose and open to interpretation around privacy etc. What makes self hosted data different? Surely that’s not a major barrier to big tech, the government, the lawmakers etc.?
If they really wanted to, I’m sure they could just decide, “as of today we can take your self hosted data, so we will swing by at 4pm to collect it”. 4pm comes, they are at your door, what are you gonna do? They come and take your data, you know it’s wrong, what are you gonna do?
I just worry that even the holy grail of privacy, i.e. self hosted data, is going to be of little consequence to them. If people want your data bad enough, they will do wherever is needed to get it. Change laws? No problem. Reduce rights? Yep we’re in it. And so on.
It seems like the only truly safe way to store your data is by not putting it anywhere other than in your head.
What makes self hosted data different?
You can’t be compelled to testify against yourself.
4pm comes, they are at your door, what are you gonna do?
If they have a warrant, they can have it. It’s encrypted anyway. If they don’t have a warrant, it’s not admissible in court anyway. Let em have it.
I just worry that even the holy grail of privacy, i.e. self hosted data, is going to be of little consequence to them.
It’s outside of their control. Nothing they can do. Encryption is legal.
Nothing they can do. Encryption is legal.
Until the change laws so that you have to hand over keys, passwords etc.
Passwords are protected under the 5th Amendment, as it’s something “from your mind” that would fall under self-incriminating. Hence why people say if you’re at a protest with your phone put it into lockdown mode so you have to input a code/password to open it as they can legally force you to use your thumb/face to unlock it.
We’re pretty fucked up as a nation right now, but in order to repeal or nullify a previous amendment you’d have to get a fuckton of states or representatives to agree and we literally can’t agree on shit, so it’ll never happen (Hell, Prohibition is literally the only amendment we’ve ever repealed in 250 years).
No law can revoke that and you’d have an easy case if someone did force you to give passwords.
This is hilariously wrong. The reality is they can use biometrics to open it without a warrant. They can and will force you to unlock it with a warrant.
Any lawyers reading this post are either cackling or bashing their head into a brick wall.
Motherfucker I said that biometric ISN’T protected and that you SHOULD go password only for that exact reason. ANd I wasn’t talking about warrants and subpoena, that falls under the 4th Amendment. 5th is self incrimination.
Passwords are protected under the 5th Amendment, as it’s something “from your mind” that would fall under self-incriminating
That argument falls apart quickly if you use a password manager and have it generate your passwords though.
Edit: and it assumes due process in the justice system, something that seems to be eroding.
Still need the password for the manager
What does a password manager have to do with anything?
because then the passwords generated by the password manager (which, let’s be honest, is how most people use them) are no longer a “thing from your mind”
Do you have legal precedent for that?
If they don’t have a warrant, it’s not admissible in court anyway. Let em have it.
Oh it’s definitely admissible in court if you willingly hand it over. If they have no warrant, they have no legal right to enter your home, and you don’t need to talk with them. But that doesn’t apply if you invite them in and let them start developing probable cause of a crime.
That’s true. I misspoke. I mean if they try to take it without a warrant. You can decline but you can’t stop them.
Thanks, appreciate the clarity.
I hope its as simple as that.
It’s not. This reply is incredibly naive. They can compel you to give the password to your phone, why wouldn’t they be able to compel you to give the password to your encryption? There’s a reason so many cases are solved via phone contents even though that’s “testifying against yourself”. If they have a warrant and you refuse you’ll definitely be charged with obstruction. Also in court there’s a concept where if you refuse to provide evidence the court/jury is instructed to assume that it’s as bad as it can possibly be, making sure you’re going to lose.
That’s what I thought, hence the “I hope…”. I wasn’t hopeful with the “I hope…” 😁.
I just don’t trust nowadays that there are enough or sufficient safeguards for people, regardless of what way their data is stored. OK you might hold out and not give them your encryption key from your head, and on that singular point you technically win, but at what cost with the litany of other things you will be nailed for, as you have outlined. You can think about that win from your prison cell I guess?
Loss is almost predetermined in situations like this.
Most of this seems to relate mainly to the US, and I dont live there, but this shit is still frightening.
I would guess this is the case everywhere. If there was, “I don’t want to give you evidence” loophole so many people would walk away no problem. I mean, this literally how Alex Jones lost. They refused to comply with discovery so the judge said you lose, let’s go to the judgement phase. There was no trial.
This reply is incredibly wrong. They cannot compel you to give your password. This is super basic 5th amendment stuff. Start reading.
There is/was a guy being held in jail because he wouldn’t give his hard drive encryption password. https://goldsteinmehta.com/blog/limits-on-federal-civil-contempt
18 months is a long time.
After looking into it more there seems to be a “circuit split”. US vs Brown said passwords were protected, so it seems undecided.
Your particular instance seems to be unique in that they knew for a fact that the drives has child pornography. Both from the testimony of the sister and from the logs of the Mac that they were attached to.
Sort of. If law enforcement already knows the information that would be unlocked by the password they can compel you to unlock it through the “foregone conclusion” exception. They can also compel you to unlock a fingerprint scanner.
Just say you don’t remember it.
You have rights, kinda. You can refuse to hand over data if they have no warrant.
If you are compelled to hand over data, it can be fully encrypted. You cannot be compelled to give them the key as long as the only place it’s stored is in your head.
Thanks.
If I found myself in a situation where I had a key in my head and it was what they were looking for, I’d worry about what other ways they might screw me if I didnt give it up. They would find a way.
It’s all really bleak at the moment. First time in my 46 years of life that I’ve genuinely worried about how the world is evolving.
It is bleak, but if you’re at the stage if being tortured for an encryption key, you’re already fucked.
It’s a good idea to keep data local. It’s an even better idea to encrypt it. But it’s not going to completely protect you from a fascist government.
