Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday March 17 2018, @08:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the if-you-have-nothing-to-hide dept.

In a story that should interest anyone involved in on-line security the Canadian Press reports that:

The chief executive of a Vancouver-based company appeared in a Washington state court on Thursday in the first U.S. case in which a company has been targeted for providing criminal drug cartels with the technology to evade law enforcement, the U.S. Justice Department said.

Phantom Secure CEO Vincent Ramos was indicted, along with four of his associates, on charges related to providing criminal organizations with cellular phones and encrypted networks to coordinate the shipment of illegal drugs around the world.

"Phantom Secure allegedly provided a service designed to allow criminals the world over to evade law enforcement to traffic drugs and commit acts of violent crime without detection," said FBI Director Christopher Wray in a statement.

CNBC suggests that Phantom Secure was selling "hacked" BlackBerry and Samsung phones:

The people behind a company that hacked Samsung and BlackBerry phones to make them more secure, have been indicted for allegedly conspiring with drug cartels to help them evade law enforcement and sell narcotics.

Phantom Secure, a Canada-based firm, sold Samsung and BlackBerry devices that had been modified with a higher encryption. This made it difficult for the authorities to trace drug traffickers.

Phantom Secure's web site does say that:

We are a law-abiding company that is permitted to deliver encrypted communication services to our clients in order for them to protect their communications, without having the ability to decrypt their communications. Our service does not require personal information and has no back doors.

In providing such a service we do understand that there will be a very small number of people that may use our service to do activities we do not support. We do not condone the use of our service for any type of illegal activities and if known we will terminate the use of our service without notice. Considering this, requests for the contents of communications may arise from government agencies, which would require a valid search warrant from an agency with proper jurisdiction over Phantom Secure. However, our response to such requests will be the content and identity of our clients are not stored on our server and that the content is encrypted data, which is indecipherable.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday March 17 2018, @05:10PM (3 children)

    by hemocyanin (186) on Saturday March 17 2018, @05:10PM (#654143) Journal

    Sworn testimony by the FBI? LOL

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 17 2018, @09:12PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 17 2018, @09:12PM (#654218)

    I'd take their word over yours any day. And twice on Sundays.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday March 18 2018, @04:46AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Sunday March 18 2018, @04:46AM (#654349) Journal

      Weird -- I've never tried to get a national hero to kill himself, but have it your way.

  • (Score: 2) by tonyPick on Sunday March 18 2018, @12:56PM

    by tonyPick (1237) on Sunday March 18 2018, @12:56PM (#654447) Homepage Journal

    If you ignore what the FBI says just because they are "big government", and then just take the "big government is bad" spin on stories as true, then all you've done is swap out one form of Gullible for another. Only you're easier to fool, because you're being taken in by things you want to believe,

    You don't have to *trust* the FBI, to look at the evidence they actually produce and judge how plausible (or otherwise) that evidence is, and you don't have to like the conclusions to assess how likely they are to be true.