[Cryptography] Apple 3rd Party dilemma

[Henry Baker]

At 08:27 PM 2/19/2016, Watson Ladd wrote:
>On Feb 19, 2016 2:49 PM, "Henry Baker" <<mailto:hbaker1 at pipeline.com>hbaker1 at pipeline.com> wrote:
>> The elephant in the room is the "Third Party Doctrine", which basically provides the govt "most favored nation status": if you as a customer provide your data to *any* third party, then the govt will claim access, as well.  (I believe that this is the modern version of the old "Lord of the Manor" privilege, which allowed the Lord of the Manor access to any maid in his territory who wishes to marry; for this reason, I suggest that the 3rd Party Doctrine be renamed the "Government Rape Doctrine", which might help to speed its demise.)
>
>That's not true either.  All the 3rd party doctrine holds is that you do not have a 4th amendment interest in the possessions of another, including information you gave to them.  They can still contest any searches, and the warrant requirement doesn't go away.  The third party doctrine simply says that if you give me evidence of a crime, I can hand it over to the government and you can't stop me.
>
>Comparisons to rape are simply ridiculous.

You might want to ask Lavabit's Ladar Levison how he felt.  The interviews I've heard sound one heck of a lot like virtual rape.

The Lavabit NSL also asked for the keys to Lavabit's whole kingdom -- not a targeted search of a particular customer.  So much for the 4th Amendment rights of all of the rest of Lavabit's customers.

E.g.:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/why-did-lavabit-shut-down-snowden-email