Amazon is just one of several companies recently accused of turning to encrypted messaging apps like Signal that can permanently erase messages automatically.
You may recall the government making similar arguments about Sam Bankman-Fried’s use of Signal during his trial for fraud and how that verdict eventually shook out. Deleted chats were also a sticking point for at least one juror in Google’s recent courtroom loss to Epic Games and came up in the DOJ’s antitrust trial against Google.
So are they using these trials in their crusade against encryption and having articles like this in hopes of turning the public against it? Because it looks like it to me.
The FTC’s lawyers say Bezos, current CEO Andy Jassy, general counsel David Zapolsky, former CEO of worldwide operations Dave Clark, and other execs are all Signal users. Bezos is identified in the document as “a heavy Signal user” who instructed others to use the app, although the 2018 hacking of his personal cellphone may be part of the reason for that.
Then a few paragraphs later they reveal Bezos has been an encryption fan and user of the service for 5+ years while trying to get others to use it… I get it, Amazon is doing shady shit, but this feels to me like the government is trying to get encryption frowned upon.
When the government says to start preserving records, you start preserving records.
There is no need to pretend this is some government posture over secure messaging. This literally about the lack of saving those messages. How they were sent is irrelevant as long as a copy can be provided.
And because Amazon didn’t instruct employees to preserve messages sent in the app until more than 15 months after it was notified of the investigation
I somehow misconstrued this line into thinking they had been using it for those 15 months and were then notified they weren’t supposed to. I screwed up there.
US government is definitely against encryption, but there is a difference between using encryption/disappearing messages when you are not indicted and when you are indicted. First one is fine, second one is against the 18 U.S. Code § 1519 law.
So are they using these trials in their crusade against encryption and having articles like this in hopes of turning the public against it? Because it looks like it to me.
Then a few paragraphs later they reveal Bezos has been an encryption fan and user of the service for 5+ years while trying to get others to use it… I get it, Amazon is doing shady shit, but this feels to me like the government is trying to get encryption frowned upon.
When the government says to start preserving records, you start preserving records.
There is no need to pretend this is some government posture over secure messaging. This literally about the lack of saving those messages. How they were sent is irrelevant as long as a copy can be provided.
I see.
I somehow misconstrued this line into thinking they had been using it for those 15 months and were then notified they weren’t supposed to. I screwed up there.
That is missing from every headline, and sub headline on this story wherever it is submitted.
Thank you for pointing it out .
US government is definitely against encryption, but there is a difference between using encryption/disappearing messages when you are not indicted and when you are indicted. First one is fine, second one is against the 18 U.S. Code § 1519 law.