The FBI provided a search warrant for the owners property, and that included the contents of the safe. The owner was arrested for January 6th activity, a felony and some misdemeanors. All seems pretty appropriate to me. Funny how the "law and order" and "back the blue" people change their tune when the states legal apparatus is directed at them.
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
23 points (78.0% liked)
Privacy
803 readers
1 users here now
Privacy is the ability for an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves, and thereby express themselves selectively.
Rules
- Don't do unto others what you don't want done unto you.
- No Porn, Gore, or NSFW content. Instant Ban.
- No Spamming, Trolling or Unsolicited Ads. Instant Ban.
- Stay on topic in a community. Please reach out to an admin to create a new community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Alternative headline 'Company complies with warrant.'
Seems to me though that if someone else can open it that's not very 'safe'.
Anyone with physical access to a system can eventually access a system. All a safe does is stall access inside, hopefully as a deterrent or to let you interrupt the process.
Its not like the feds cant get a saw and a drill if they have a warrent. This is just more reasonable.
A safe company gives access to a customer’s safe without a court order? You had one job to do, and it was basically done… this seems bad for business, maybe if they’re publicly traded the stakeholders should take action against current leadership.
Please note my comments are completely separate from whoever happens to be the owner of the safe. That shouldn’t be relevant at all.
I believe the same standard should be held for customer data as well. Why wouldn’t there be an expectation that purchasing a safe is basically a zero trust platform. If it breaks or I lose my combo/key, I’ll need a locksmith to “break” in.
I believe there was a court order. I think people should however be upset that they're selling a safe that apparently has a backdoor in it.
It wasn’t terribly clear, but the paperwork sounded pretty flimsy at best. While I like the thought the company shouldn’t install a back door, but I’d bet they all pretty much have one.
The federalist is a alt-right wing rag, so I would take any of their claims with a large chunk of salt.
No "news" org that unprompted refers to the FBI as the "disgraced federal law enforcement agency" when talking about legally executing a warrant on a jan 6th terrorist is worth the electrons its printed on.
And just for an extra dash of "no duh, our agenda is clear" they have a fear mongering chyron in red flashing at the top of the site about Hillary clinton, a politician that's been retired for 7 yrs.
Yeah, totally fair. I wouldn’t ever try to disagree with any of that.
I’m honestly trying to avoid the cluster that is everything going on and look at the safe company.
I think I’m upset that I had higher hopes for Liberty as a safe company. Partially because they did comply, but wholly because there was a way to comply. That kind of money on a safe should lead to, call a locksmith that can break in.