Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by LeifCarrotson on Thursday January 11, 2018 @10:45AM
(#16124744)
"It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a HideDataFromPolice procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a HideDataFrom procedure, to which Police could be given as a parameter."
- Nathaniel Borenstein (paraphrased)
Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by mcguire on Thursday January 11, 2018 @11:06AM
(#16124976)
"The only original rule in engineering ethics was not to compete against other engineers on the basis of price." (Henry Petroski, from memory)
Software engineering doesn't even follow that rule.
Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by Bogdanovich on Saturday January 13, 2018 @03:14AM
(#16138719)
Not all government officials and police officers are the same. For example Magnitskiy scandal in Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Magnitsky#Exposing_the_...
TL/DR: police had given the materials taken during the police raids to organized criminals, who used them to fraudulently reclaim $230m of the taxes previously paid by the company.
Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by rlanday on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:11PM
(#16126163)
Come on, software engineers love writing crypto software to hide information from the government…
Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by dx034 on Thursday January 11, 2018 @10:43AM
(#16124725)
In case of robbery you wouldn't have time to call the number. Tech offices don't tend to get robbed when people are at their computers. And if they aren't, devices should be locked and files with it.
Re:Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark
by ihsw2 on Thursday January 11, 2018 @10:45AM
(#16124745)
Indeed, the tool was developed in an environment where government agencies and related LEOs are categorized as antagonistic and hostile entities, oftentimes operating at the behest of Uber's competitors.
Surely we're all aware that financial avarice is rampant in developing/emerging markets and, when presented with an unaccommodating adversary, these developing/emerging markets will readily resort to "fishing expeditions" and other avenues of blatant extortion.
I like to believe that if there's a legitimate use for a tool, then the tool is fine. What's the difference between a lawful search warrant and robbery? Why do we focus on the text rather than the fact that the leadership created a protocol and a scheme to do this? Why does Travis get a pass?