#236: Low Hanging Fruit with Professor Daskal

Tech Policy Podcast

TechFreedom

Technology

4.8 • 46 Ratings

🗓️ 10 September 2018

⏱️ 24 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Law enforcement continues to face challenges with the evolving problems associated with digital evidence gathering. Just last year, US law enforcement made over 130,000 requests for digital evidence to just six tech companies - Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and Oath. These requests to internet service providers have not gone smoothly, as law enforcement is often not suited to accommodate such technical requests or simply do not know what they are looking for. Service providers, in turn, are quite reluctant to comply with these demand for “any and all” data, citing fears that trade secrets or sensitive information will be leaked. Today Jennifer C. Daskal, Adjunct Professor at American University Washington College of Law, is here to discuss her recently published CSIS report titled “Low Hanging Fruit” on what challenges law enforcement encounter, how to address these problems, and policy recommendations to Congress, law enforcement agencies, and Service Providers.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Welcome to the Tech Policy Podcast. I'm Ashken Kazarin. On today's show, we have Professor Jan Daskell from American University-Washington College of Law joining us to discuss her recently published CSIS report titled Low Hanging Fruit on what challenges law enforcement
0:24.1	encounters and how to address these problems when they collect digital evidence. Professor
0:29.9	Daskell, thank you for joining us. Thank you.
0:32.9	So how does the report that she just published recently differ from other discussions on encryption and related
0:39.4	issues? So this report was designed specifically to put encryption issues aside. CsIS had done an
0:48.5	earlier report about some of the challenges posed by encryption, and in the course of that report,
0:54.8	which I was not involved with, they discovered that there were a range of other issues facing law enforcement
1:00.3	in its ability to access digital evidence that were separate and apart from the encryption
1:05.0	debate. So the purpose of this report was to focus on that range of other issues, recognizing that these are issues
1:13.7	that are important to address no matter how the encryption debate is ultimately resolved.
1:18.4	So you report identified four broad issue categories that are relevant to law enforcement
1:23.7	capacity to leverage digital evidence. What are these categories?
1:28.9	So there's questions about training, questions about knowledge, questions about resources,
1:33.8	and legal authorities.
1:35.5	But really, I mean, kind of the headline from the report is what we found both in a series
1:41.5	of qualitative interviews that I did along with my co-author, Will Carter,
1:45.6	and in a survey results, based on a survey that we commissioned of state, local,
1:52.3	and federal law enforcement officials from across the country,
1:55.7	is that the biggest problem that law enforcement has been facing
1:59.6	is in identifying which service providers have data of relevance to their cases and then figuring out how to go about and accessing that data.
2:10.3	I also came across this issue in your report that providers and law enforcement have a certain tension between them.
2:20.4	What does this have to?
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from TechFreedom, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of TechFreedom and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.