
NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case - danso
https://www.wmur.com/article/nh-judge-orders-amazon-to-give-echo-recordings-in-double-homicide-case/24893714
======
danso
I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested
in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do
they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin
to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually
activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect
himself?

I was also interested in this quote:

> _" I think most people probably don't even realize that Alexa is taking
> account of what's going on in your house, in addition to responding to your
> demands and commands," said Albert Scherr, a professor at the University of
> New Hampshire School of Law._

What is it that users don’t realize? Anecdotally, just about everyone I know
who has refused to have an Echo do so because they believe Echo is doing far
more surreptitious surveillance and analysis, i.e. not just listening for the
trigger word. Though I’m sure most users don’t realize that when Alexa does
trigger, she sends the audio to the Amazon mothership, which are then
stored/analyzed for an indefinite time. Though most people don’t realize the
most basic things about data, like how when you friend someone on FB, FB
actually stores a log of your friends, and any other kind of stated
interaction, such as the users you’ve blocked

~~~
nolok
I sincerely doubt people don't realise that anything after the trigger is sent
home, since a "feature" of alexa is that the app let you see each request you
made, how alexa answered, and let them know if she got it wrong.

I think it's more a case of "don't care" / "don't realize the risks"

~~~
pbhjpbhj
People perhaps assume all audio is processed locally and/or isn't stored
except ephemerally.

I'd imagine there's a default "we store your data for AI training purposes"
that would allow them to keep all audio.

~~~
acpetrov
> People perhaps assume all audio is processed locally and/or isn't stored
> except ephemerally.

Is there info on this from Amazon? I'd assume they do what you mention, have
the speech recognition in the Alexa and just send up the words, not the entire
audio stream.

Interesting implication of that in this case: if the actual audio is gone and
you just have the transcription, is that valid as evidence? Or is it something
closer to hearsay

~~~
detaro
It's cloud based. The device recognizes the wake-word offline and starts
streaming to the recognition service. You can access a log of recordings
through the app, so they are kept at least for a while.

------
shakna
I still don't understand why this is possible.

I've frequently seen the claim that an Echo only records brief snippets,
looking for the wake word.

If that's so, there's next to nothing for Amazon to hand over.

~~~
themagician
It’s not possible. This is a classic example of the legal system confusing
reality with science fiction.

You can monitor Echo itself over your network and quickly realize that it’s
not sending a constant stream of voice data. For the most part the device is
off until it hears its name.

~~~
curiousgal
Maybe they're hoping one of the parties involved yelled "Alexa!" as the crime
was taking place. /s

~~~
ISL
Alexa, call the police! #### is here, and he's trying to hurt me!

Seems like a pretty good use for a voice-activated service.

"Alexa, lock the doors!" also sounds useful in this context.

~~~
mtgx
Attacker: Alexa unlock the door for me.

~~~
ams6110
I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that.

------
gammateam
My company responds to subpoenas with a wiki article on how client side
encryption works

~~~
citrablue
This is a glib and unhelpful response. Does your company potentially have
access to data that may be useful in a legal investigation? Do you provide
server side voice recognition services as accurate as Alexa/Google?

My company would respond to a similar subpoena by explaining that we make
archery bows from wood. That also doesn't add anything to the HN discussion.

~~~
pritambaral
> My company would respond to a similar subpoena by explaining that we make
> archery bows from wood. That also doesn't add anything to the HN discussion.

I believe your parent's comment is relevant to this HN discussion, quite
unlike your company's occupation. Your parent's comment suggests their
company's users upload data (albeit encrypted client-side) to the company, so
a judge could — without an understanding of client-side encryption —
reasonably subpoena the company for user data. Compared to that, it is quite
unlikely a judge would mistake a company that makes wooden archery bows for a
company that collects much user data, or believe that the former fact has much
to do with the latter supposition.

------
rocky1138
Can you replace the link with this one?
[https://apnews.com/ebe802c103d64412aaef707e8719e946](https://apnews.com/ebe802c103d64412aaef707e8719e946)

The existing link is a spamfest.

~~~
cheschire
The existing link is also blocked in Germany. Your link, however, functions.

~~~
em-bee
rather i guess the site is blocking access from europe because of the GDPR

------
PunchTornado
I don't see what the problem is here. Amazon is required to just send some
files to the court which is fine.

It's not like the iphone case where FBI wanted a sort of permanent backdoor
that could be used for everyone.

If a murder happened in your house, the police should receive your echo logs
from amazon.

------
pasbesoin
Somebody or other's rule of action/expectation: If they can, they will.

The only brake is significant enough fear of repercussions to themselves.

I guess now I should RTFA. But seriously, put a monitoring device in your home
("Smart TV's, too; whatever), and it will be monitored.

P.S. I hope I don't sound callous about the particular circumstance. Just,
from an HN perspective, I think of more and ubiquitous technological
oversight. And when I think e.g. of insurance companies measuring every last
thing I do...

------
bob_paulson
Where is the limit between the right to privacy and the need to help justice?
Is the right to privacy immutable?

------
znpy
> Sorry, this content is not available in your region.

------
zaroth
In a surprise to no one, recording devices installed in users’ homes have
recordings used in a court of law against the homeowner.

In a surprise to no one, the third party doctrine means a warrant isn’t even
required to demand these recordings from the cloud provider.

In a surprise to no one, the NSA can intercept these recordings (and
associated speech to text transcripts), load all the associated data into
their monster correlation engine, mine the shit out of it, and say they didn’t
“collect” anything because they haven’t actually put a bag over your head,
driven you to a black site, and waterboarded you. Yet.

~~~
walrus01
And people looked at you like you were an absolute raving loon if you tried to
explain the architecture of the ECHELON program, 15 years ago. Now who's
laughing...

I encourage everyone who is not familiar with them to read all of James
Bamford's books on the NSA. And Robert Baer's books on the CIA.

~~~
zaroth
But why make the government pay for it, when users will go on Amazon.com and
pay to install their very own personal cloud home listening devices all by
themselves?!

~~~
iknowstuff
They're insignificant in all of this compared to smartphones.

~~~
14
This is what I was thinking as well. Slowly creep until they have to power to
turn on a persons phone at will to look and listen.

~~~
monotone666
I once drew the ire of a large private security company and could have sworn
they had the ability to listen to my cell phone microphone

------
Improvotter
> Sorry, this content is not available in your region.

Aka: "We're not gonna adhere to privacy shit."

~~~
AlexB138
Or "we're not interested in being regulated by a foreign government".

~~~
ainiriand
Is there such thing as foreign in the internet? Can you choose to just not
adhere to a law that protects the users? If the law was unfair it would be
fair to resist, though.

~~~
betterunix2
Yes, there is such a thing as "foreign" on the Internet, a fact that has been
dramatically demonstrated by China and North Korea, and also less dramatically
by America (copyrights) and Europe (copyrights and privacy regulations). It is
easy to forget that the Internet is only as international as governments are
willing to allow, and that a government can (and some have) disconnect the
domestic network in some country from the global Internet.

------
wpdev_63
This isn't really a shocker. They have been known since 2006[0] that the
police(+TLA's) can use your cellphone as a eavesdropping tool.

The biggest problem I fear is that this will become socially acceptable in US
as it has with the authoritarian gov't in China.

[0]:[https://www.cnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-
eavesdr...](https://www.cnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-
eavesdropping-tool/)

~~~
trhway
Why it may be not socially acceptable yet, it is already socially accepted :).

Between smartphone, car computer, video cameras everywhere, license plates
readers, credit card records, etc. government has pretty much all the details
of my life (in some fusion center by Palantir). Adding smart home, drones and
whatever else just incrementally improves the quality of that collection while
not changing the already established situation in principle.

~~~
wpdev_63
I guess it's known in very certain circles on what goes in the 'establishment'
but to say that it is now socially acceptable? I doubt it.

Actually, after the Snowden revelations, there was a big political uproar and
they almost got enough votes to completely defund the NSA[0]. Unfortunately
our constitutional lawyer in charge(obama) was able to defeat the bill.

While they are collecting everything on everyone pretty much(xkeyscore, prism,
turbine etc), there's a good chance that things will change when people are
aware of it. As we have the right to choose who leads us.

[0]: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-
politics/wp/2013/07...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-
politics/wp/2013/07/24/plan-to-defund-nsa-phone-collection-program-has-broad-
support-sponsor-says/?utm_term=.d17b142b5efb)

