BlackBerry replied: http://blogs.blackberry.com/2016/04...enship-and-doing-whats-right/?linkId=23553845
If they felt that it was their responsibility to unmask someone then why lie about it? Why not just tell the public what they did if they felt it was the right thing to do.
The big issue here for me is that BlackBerry uses a single decryption key, and supposedly provided that key to the Mounties rather than simply provide the data upon being presented with a warrant. Now the Mounties can use that key to access data without lawful reason and potentially without any control or oversight. I'm still not giving up my BlackBerry, however.
Yes, that's the biggest problem. They (and who knows who else) have the key that they (and others) can use to decrypt data. Those keys can be considered as being leaked or stolen and shouldn't be trusted and used any more. That seems as a really bad decision by BB. OTOH they don't say what police really wanted - only data or keys.
It sounds very analogous to the Lavabit scenario - except in that case, he shut down, which I guess was not an option for BB. But it's easy for hired executives to make oh-so moral decisions (the "greater good") - when they are buying themselves a few more years lavish salary and bonuses. Corporate behavior seems to equate the greater good with that. In both cases, technically it's illustrating a deficiency in the technical design, that you'd have to compromise all users in order to monitor one. On the other hand, that deficiency is harder to overcome but now necessary because of the LE over-reach and mass surveillance.
