[Shanerredflag]

You need to research the field of forensics analysis of electronic communications.

Sent from my SEXY HOT RED SGIII using Tapatalk 2

All in fun but.....this is what I was trying to say:

Legal considerations

The examination of digital media is covered by national and international legislation. For civil investigations, in particular, laws may restrict the abilities of analysts to undertake examinations. Restrictions against network monitoring, or reading of personal communications often exist.[26] During criminal investigation, national laws restrict how much information can be seized.[26] For example, in the United Kingdom seizure of evidence by law enforcement is governed by the PACE act.[6] The "International Organization on Computer Evidence" (IOCE) is one agency that works to establish compatible international standards for the seizure of evidence.[27]

In the UK the same laws covering computer crime can also affect forensic investigators. The 1990 computer misuse act legislates against unauthorised access to computer material; this is a particular concern for civil investigators who have more limitations than law enforcement.

An individuals right to privacy is one area of digital forensics which is still largely undecided by courts. The US Electronic Communications Privacy Act places limitations on the ability of law enforcement or civil investigators to intercept and access evidence. The act makes a distinction between stored communication (e.g. email archives) and transmitted communication (such as VOIP). The latter, being considered more of a privacy invasion, is harder to obtain a warrant for.[6][16] The ECPA also affects the ability of companies to investigate the computers and communications of their employees, an aspect that is still under debate as to the extent to which a company can perform such monitoring.[6]

Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights asserts similar privacy limitations to the ECPA and limits the processing and sharing of personal data both within the EU and with external countries. The ability of UK law enforcement to conduct digital forensics investigations is legislated by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.[6]

[hornlovah]

...Snip...
The ability of UK law enforcement to conduct digital forensics investigations is legislated by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.[6]

@Shanerredflag have you read RIPA? Please refer to Part III if the act which �requires persons to supply decrypted information*(which had been previously encrypted by the owner) and/or the*cryptographic key*to government representatives. Failure to disclose these items is a criminal offence, with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.�

[Shanerredflag]

@Shanerredflag have you read RIPA? Please refer to Part III if the act which “requires persons to supply decrypted information*(which had been previously encrypted by the owner) and/or the*cryptographic key*to government representatives. Failure to disclose these items is a criminal offence, with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.“

Yup, which brings this back to my original comment "Can authorities request information legally from the party they want this info from....yes." But big brother cannot randomly "snoop" where ever and when ever they please, which was implied earlier...just my four cents.

[hornlovah]

Yup, which brings this back to my original comment "Can authorities request information legally from the party they want this info from....yes." But big brother cannot randomly "snoop" where ever and when ever they please, which was implied earlier...just my four cents.

LOL, a law that requires "reasonable suspicion" that authorities might be preventing or detecting a some sort of crime might not be the best example of "big brother cannot randomly "snoop.""

[Shanerredflag]

Only point being warrent(s), thus eliminating the "random"

[hornlovah]

Only point being warrent(s), thus eliminating the "random"

I'm afraid that we are getting off-topic here, and it's not fair to those still subscribed to this thread. One of the many complaints against RIPA was that it "allows chief constables (and others) to approve intrusive surveillance without the need for a search warrant or indeed without any judicial involvement." Please refer to Section 49. I'm not particularly interested in UK law, but would be willing to discuss if you start a new thread.

[BergerKing]

Hey, we all have our fun...this is even the avatar of our WhatsApp group, a collection of BB junkies who are currently on the Methadone of other systems until we can mainline our favorite again.

From the post BK is referring, "i use a blackberry, therefore i'm a BlackBerry user and abuser,"

So you're saying J is a drug user and weed abuser? Maybe he/she needs to move to Washington State where those activities are legal within the state border unless federal law enforcement intercepts him/her on a highway.

[qbnkelt]

Only point being warrent(s), thus eliminating the "random"

You obtain the warrant after a good amount of monitoring and surveillance.

Besides, anyone on BES would know that they are subject to monitoring. It's part of the disclosure of being on BES. if the disclosure is not made the company is liable for privacy violations. Therefore, on BES, monitoring already occurred.

Lastly, quoting a piece of a regulation in a specific country is not only applicable only to that specific country, it did not provide nuances that would be there in full text not does it address the implementation of the regulation.

When reading regs out of context as you would when reading pieces, you can come to an absolutely incorrect conclusion.

Sent from my SEXY HOT RED SGIII using Tapatalk 2

[Omnitech]

FWIW, I just discovered that in Japan, one of the reasons that the law enforcement there rely heavily on 'confessions' is that they are *severely* limited in evidence collection - apparently can't even do a traditional telephone wiretap over there. I found that quite interesting. Apparently something passed post-WWII in response to draconian state-monitoring of the populace.

[Nindia]

FWIW, I just discovered that in Japan, one of the reasons that the law enforcement there rely heavily on 'confessions' is that they are *severely* limited in evidence collection - apparently can't even do a traditional telephone wiretap over there. I found that quite interesting. Apparently something passed post-WWII in response to draconian state-monitoring of the populace.

BRB, moving to Japan.

[aha]

Everyone has something they want to hide from someone. I don't care who you are.

exactly

[silversun10]

Everyone has something they want to hide from someone. I don't care who you are.

that used to be called privacy, but in the age of Facebook that has gone over the cliff...

[skyrocket9]

syllogism's are fun

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[Omnitech]

that used to be called privacy, but in the age of Facebook that has gone over the cliff...

Yet some of us are not drinking that KoolAid.

Which is why I do not have an FB account. Nor will I use an Android smartphone, but instead am eagerly awaiting BB10, which I feel will be more responsible about how it handles my personal information.

[Nindia]

Besides twitter (to follow others...hardly tweet myself) I have zero desire to use any social media outlets.

BBM is the most secure "social media" in my opinion. BBM groups is perfect also.

[bambinoitaliano]

Okay back to the topic about Criminals use Blackberry. They also uses toilet paper.

[Ben1232]

Okay back to the topic about Criminals use Blackberry. They also uses toilet paper.

Stolen toilet paper !

[olblueyez]

Apple executives don't use Blackberry. But they treat the people making their stuff like cockroaches.

Of course criminals use other brands.

[Shanerredflag]

Still need a warrant but....

.....

[BitPusher2600]

RIM is a company that makes a product which somehow has a crack addiction effect on some people and it's perfectly legal. In creating their products, they set you up so that once you've been there, they will always make you an offer you can't refuse. Welcome to the darkside.

[GunzRx]

There will always be a trail. How would the criminals get the money out of their BBM accounts and into their hands so they can buy things? That money would have to be transferred to a bank account and then withdrawn or used via a debit card. The link is still there.

If RIM created a way to collect money with BBM that allowed you to just use NFC to tap and make anonymous payments in store, then they would become the worlds largest bank in a hurry.

Just use a vcc, you can throw enough sand in your pursuer's eyes to make them go to the next best target.

Actually....they are supposedly going to leave us alone, though I guess the federal response guidelines haven't been released yet, but I doubt they will be intercepting people on highways like that unless they decided to crack down on it.

And this is crackberry, so saying someone is a blackberry user and abuser is just crackberry lingo, they weren't saying anything about real drugs....

Probably going to raid growers, and stores like in Cali.

Keep in mind these devices are used for Government official communications, and when set up correctly (strongest encryption, 15+ character complex password) considered "safe" from data retrieval on the device. The BES of course can be set to audit everything (or block what cannot be audited).

Best way is to stay out of court, look up Dean Clifford practice and preach those methods and you'll beat any tickets or charges the 'gov.' puts on you like I did (and will continue to do, f**k the police, but thumbs up to the peace officers).

Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just for starters. Do you honestly think that any law enforcement agency in their right mind is going to make it trivial for someone to get hold of a document that discusses in intimate detail how undercover communications monitoring works? If they did that, then their ability to monitor things is immediately eroded if not decimated.

I have been working long enough in the I.T. and telecom security field to be very very confident of what I wrote above on this.

One thing RIM does NOT do is thumb their nose at national governmental or law-enforcement's legal requirements. Since among other things, those entities are some of their most important customers. We can't even have that speed-trap mapping app in BB World because RIM doesn't want to annoy law-enforcement entities. (Much to my personal chagrin, actually - because I think it's none of their business what independent citizens choose to share in terms of such public information, especially when it is often abused to generate unjustified and confiscatory revenues for local governments.)

'Legal Requirements' tbh looking at gov. agency conduct it's a big bully and you should expect to be snooped on, harrassed, etc. The saying goes look at how the worst are treated then fast forward; in jail prisoners are beaten and put in solitary for no reason, and police like to harass and do stupid stuff in the hood. Look at Toronto's Carding policy, or videos on youtube/other countries etc.

Maintain your own privacy don't expect RIM to help, in the end people work at RIM and don't want to be harassed they'll do the minimal to keep your good will, and PR but will play ball at any and all times. The only 'company' that was slightly on the public's side (wikileaks) has its leader sitting in an embassy trying to smuggle himself out. Remember I said that.

All in fun but.....this is what I was trying to say:

Legal considerations

The examination of digital media is covered by national and international legislation. For civil investigations, in particular, laws may restrict the abilities of analysts to undertake examinations. Restrictions against network monitoring, or reading of personal communications often exist.[26] During criminal investigation, national laws restrict how much information can be seized.[26] For example, in the United Kingdom seizure of evidence by law enforcement is governed by the PACE act.[6] The "International Organization on Computer Evidence" (IOCE) is one agency that works to establish compatible international standards for the seizure of evidence.[27]

In the UK the same laws covering computer crime can also affect forensic investigators. The 1990 computer misuse act legislates against unauthorised access to computer material; this is a particular concern for civil investigators who have more limitations than law enforcement.

An individuals right to privacy is one area of digital forensics which is still largely undecided by courts. The US Electronic Communications Privacy Act places limitations on the ability of law enforcement or civil investigators to intercept and access evidence. The act makes a distinction between stored communication (e.g. email archives) and transmitted communication (such as VOIP). The latter, being considered more of a privacy invasion, is harder to obtain a warrant for.[6][16] The ECPA also affects the ability of companies to investigate the computers and communications of their employees, an aspect that is still under debate as to the extent to which a company can perform such monitoring.[6]

Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights asserts similar privacy limitations to the ECPA and limits the processing and sharing of personal data both within the EU and with external countries. The ability of UK law enforcement to conduct digital forensics investigations is legislated by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.[6]

Someone said some act is the law of the land in the USA, I would say it is not. A judge told someone the Criminal Code is not the law of the land in Canada know why?

S. 32 of the charter, and R v Dell 2005 lines 6-8. The charter only applies where there is proof of an agreement between you and the gov. These statutes mean jack-****, they are the stolen toilet paper (LOL) that criminals use.

@Shanerredflag have you read RIPA? Please refer to Part III if the act which “requires persons to supply decrypted information*(which had been previously encrypted by the owner) and/or the*cryptographic key*to government representatives. Failure to disclose these items is a criminal offence, with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.“

I have an affidavit submitted in court, that the government did not rebut (Making it law) that person when referring to writ of gov. means a corporation (any non-living thing entity in law can be called a corporation; gov., llc, microsoft, inc. ltd. and all the other types of companies/conglomerates) and not any flesh and blood human being; ask me for it.

This is because only flesh can shake the hand of flesh. The gov. or any corporation cannot lose blood and therefore cannot give it either. As in learn contract law and you win.

No exchange of value no contract, again in my affidavit for a case where I lauged admitted to 'doing' what they said, and still had the case thrown because the only time there's a problem is when there is a valid claim against you;

a claim means injury, damage, or fraud. Not giving a password to the 'gov'. is not one. You could say, how can I give it to the gov.? I could give it to an agent of the gov. but the gov. does not live so I can't give it anything.

I won't go on, many have already closed their ears and decided that what I say cannot be so, today in my writing I attempted to put things in a way that people may actually open their hearts and listen; alas many prefer the yokes of slavery, to the risks of freedom.

Should have kept my post short then.

"RIM is a company that makes a product which somehow has a crack addiction effect on some people and it's perfectly legal. In creating their products, they set you up so that once you've been there, they will always make you an offer you can't refuse. Welcome to the darkside."

Heroin is illegal yet they encourage tylenol use which is an opiate, vs. cannabis. 'Drugs' are bad but medicine is medicine, and the most efficient (least harm vs greatest desired effect ie less side effects) should be the one used. Anything else is un-ethical. Even looking at the bigger picture, what conditions is poppy production producing vs other substances.