Selfrando: Q and A with Georg Koppen

I would like to her the devs answer about this too. It would be sad if Tails users were left unprotected.

One US judge has a rather unique perspective on the security flaws which Selfrando hopes to address:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/06/fbis-use-of-tor-exploit-is-l…
FBI’s use of Tor exploit is like peering through “broken blinds”
Judge: Making a computer reveal its IP address does not constitute a search.
Cyrus Farivar
24 Jun 2016

> Law enforcement does not need a warrant to hack someone’s computer, according to a just-unsealed court order written by a federal judge in Virginia.
> ...
> As Ars has reported before, to breach the security normally afforded by Tor, the FBI deployed a "network investigative technique" (NIT). In a related case prosecuted out of New York, an FBI search warrant affidavit described both the pornography available to Playpen’s 150,000 members and the NIT's capabilities. As a way to ensnare users, the FBI took control of Playpen and ran it for 13 days in 2015 before shutting it down. During that period, with many users’ Tor-enabled digital shields down—revealing their true IP addresses—the government was able to identify and arrest the 135 child porn suspects.
> ...
> US District Judge Henry Coke Morgan, Jr. further explained in the order on Thursday that warrantless government-sanctioned hacking "resembles" law enforcement looking through broken blinds. In this case, however, a warrant was sought and obtained. Judge Morgan found that even if the warrant did not exist—or was found to be invalid—the search would have been valid.

So should Tom wish to peer at a young girl undressing in her bedroom, that would be fine with Judge Morgan so long as Tom is peering through "broken" blinds? Broken so obscurely that the victim does not notice anything amiss?

No, judge, you are wrong about that. Wrong as wrong could be.

You want an analogy, judge? Let me suggest one: unwarranted state-sponsored rape. You now, like this incident (one of many):

> The CBP Agent became more aggressive in his questions and accusations. That CBP Agent directed Ashley to follow him to a “detention” room, ostensibly for additional questioning. Over the course of the next few hours, Ashley:
>
> a. was handcuffed to a chair;
>
> b. had a number of CBP K9’s sniff her person (a violation of CBP policy, which prohibits the use of K9’s on a person); and,
>
> c. was taken into a separate room, patted down, and asked to squat so female investigators could visually inspect her.
>
> At no point was Cervantes advised of her Miranda rights, because forget it, Jake, it's Bordertown. The CBP's inability to locate the drugs the agent fervently believed Cervantes was smuggling into the country didn't result in the conclusion of the search. Instead, efforts escalated under the theory that Cervantes was just particularly skilled in the art of concealing drugs.
>
> First, the CBP agent deployed his own questionable medical skills to fill out a "Treatment Authorization Request." In this Immigration Health Services' form, the agent "diagnosed" Cervantes as a "potential internal carrier of foreign substances" and ordered up an X-ray. Cervantes was placed in a CBP van and taken to Holy Cross Hospital, where an all-too-willing accomplice was found in the form of Dr. Patrick F. Martinez. Once there, more questionable paperwork was completed by those involved.
>
> The Holy Cross records from Ashley’s time at the facility include a number of factual inaccuracies, including inaccurately setting out that Ashley was accompanied by her mother and arrived in a private vehicle. In reality, Ashley was transported in a CBP vehicle. Her handcuffs were not removed until she changed into a hospital gown for the alleged purpose of undergoing an X-Ray.
>
> Cervantes never underwent an X-ray. Instead, she underwent a series of non-consensual penetrations -- something most people refer to as "rape."
>
> Dr. Martinez, a male physician, entered Ashley’s room and, after asking a few cursory questions, brutally invaded her body on a warrantless and unjustified search for contraband.
>
> Dr. Martinez forcefully and digitally probed Ashley’s vagina and anus.
>
> Ashley had never before been to a gynecologist and, for the remainder of her life, will always remember that her first pelvic and rectal exams were under the most inhumane circumstances imaginable to a U.S. citizen at a hospital on U.S. soil.
>
> The searches conducted by the CBP Agents, Holy Cross and Dr. Martinez injured Ashley physically, mentally and emotionally. Her labia, vaginal opening, and anus were left raw and sore and she felt violated, demeaned and powerless as a result of the searches.
>
> Seven hours. No drugs. Multiple penetrations. No warrants. No consent. And all of this will likely be OK -- or at least not enough to leap the "qualified immunity" hurdle.
>
> The courts have frequently held that the Fourth Amendment is nothing to get too concerned about near our nation's borders, what with drugs and terrorism on the loose. If the courts find it acceptable for the CBP to seize laptops and other devices and search them without a warrant, it stands to reason they'll probably find seizing and searching the lower half of a human being without probable cause to be just one of those things that happen in service of the public's "best interest."

https://motherboard.vice.com/read/court-rules-the-fbi-does-not-need-a-w…
Court Rules the FBI Does Not Need a Warrant to Hack a Computer
Joseph Cox
23 Jun 2016

> “The Court finds that no Fourth Amendment violation occurred here because the Government did not need a warrant to capture Defendant's IP address,” Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., a senior United States District Judge, wrote in an opinion and order on Tuesday. He adds that the government did not require a warrant to extract other information from the suspect’s computer either.
> ...
> According to activists, the ruling could have serious implications for how law enforcement is able to conduct remote searches... “The implications for the decision, if upheld, are staggering: law enforcement would be free to remotely search and seize information from your computer, without a warrant, without probable cause, or without any suspicion at all,” Mark Rumold, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote in a blog post on Thursday.

"We're the government, and we are here to rape you. Bend over. We are doing this for your own good."

https://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbi-is-classifying-its-tor-browse…
The FBI Is Classifying Its Tor Browser Exploit Because 'National Security'
Joseph Cox
24 Jun 2016

> Defense teams across the US have been trying to get access to a piece of malware the FBI used to hack visitors of a child pornography site. None have been successful at obtaining all of the malware's code, and the government appears to have no intention of handing it over. Now, the FBI is classifying the Tor Browser exploit for reasons of national security, despite the exploit already being used in normal criminal investigations well over a year ago. Experts say it indicates a lack of organization or technical capabilities within the FBI.

"So, you say you were raped by a federal agent? Then here's another 20 points added to your prototerrorism score. Now we need to re-examine you. Bend over."