California Assembly considers bill to mandate encryption backdoors

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 72
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    mr o said:
    "It's just that I have a basic fundamental belief this is very important and that no American company should be above the law," Feinstein said regarding her proposal.

    AND NO LAW SHOULD BE ABOVE BASIC UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS !

    >:x
    There's no such thing as universal human rights. The US thankfully still has our individual rights which are protected by the Bill of Rights and our Constitution. Our protected rights do not extend to the entire world (or the universe).
  • Reply 42 of 72
    I am very disappointed that such bill is being considered in the state of California, which is home to Apple and many other technology companies who are very much against this. I am also very surprised that Diane Fienstein (or Feinstein)  is trying t do similar at Federal level.
  • Reply 43 of 72
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    What's so misleading is this bill is being introduced as human trafficking legislation. This is what Assembly Member Jim Cooper said of this bill:

     “Full-disk encrypted operating systems provide criminals an invaluable tool to prey on women, children, and threaten our freedoms while making the legal process of judicial court orders, useless.” 

    http://asmdc.org/members/a09/news-room/press-releases/cooper-introduces-human-trafficking-evidentiary-access-legislation

    Apple really needs to start doing more to increase public awareness about encryption because the public is easily manipulated. The government campaign against Apple is making people believe they support terrorists. This new bill introduced in California will start pushing the idea that Apple supports human trafficking too. 
    Apple needs to spend a few hundred million dollars to drum out of office every Constitution-trampling politician in California.
  • Reply 44 of 72
    ceek74ceek74 Posts: 324member
    Is Feinstein the Smoking Man's wife?
  • Reply 45 of 72
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    ceek74 said:
    Is Feinstein the Smoking Man's wife?
    She has gotten bills passed in California which evidently helped her husband's business. I consider her a deeply corrupt politician and her supporters are idiots.
  • Reply 46 of 72
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    frac said:
    It's about time to say it...Follow the Money!
    Just who is sponsoring this buffoonery? Why are all their stated reasons just cut 'n paste versions of the same thing? 
    The argument amongst the opponents of the FBI/DOJ/government have explored all the facets of the case - good, bad and problematical. The status quo?...they're stuck in repetition mode and haven't even tried to allay public fears, address constitutional concerns...nothing.
    On Fortune, they're saying that Feinstein is naming this the Freedom Bill 
    No, the "Freedom Bill" is Sensenbrenner's. Read the passage again. Doesn't change the point about how clueless the special-needs-type known as a politician is, though.

    This was on PED's blog at Fortune, for those interested.

    http://fortune.com/2016/03/10/apple-fbi-diane-feinstein/?iid=leftrail
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 47 of 72
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,030member
    Hey California, businesses don't want to deal with you anymore. Pass this one and Calif. citizens will have to go to neighboring states to buy their phones. 

    Texas-based retailer HEB Grocery Co. will ship to all US states except Hawaii, Alaska (those two solely because of higher shipping costs) and California -- Calif. because of the regulations. https://www.heb.com/static-page/article-template/Terms-and-Conditions


  • Reply 48 of 72
    focherfocher Posts: 687member
    creek0512 said:
    Despite the fact that there are outspoken supporters of encryption backdoors in both parties (all of the Republican Presidential candidates supported it at a recent debate), some people cannot stop themselves from demonizing the other party they don't vote for, even on this issue where neither party has a clear position.
    Yep
  • Reply 49 of 72
    This is an example of government coercion and oppression, clearly designed and targeted towards Apple. All phone manufacturers should stop selling phones in California in response, though this crazy bill will never pass. This is another example of tax payer's waste.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 50 of 72
    lmagoo said:
    This easily proves that our politicians...ESPECIALLY in California....are dumber than a pile of bricks!! And good o'l Feinstein is at the head of the class !!!!!
    Yes, and consider that these two terrorists may have left this iPhone, possibly with no useable data on it, to accomplish through our own government the task of weakening our society further so that other terrorists can more easily gain access to the data they need to take down infrastructure, local governments or whatever they want. Their cohorts are probably laughing at our stupidity already.
  • Reply 51 of 72
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    Holy frak, this is dumb. Next they'll force safe builders to provide a master key. 
  • Reply 52 of 72
    T.j.p.T.j.p. Posts: 25member
    "It's just that I have a basic fundamental belief this is very important and that no American company should be above the law," Feinstein said regarding her proposal.

    Well, please understand Feinstein, the Constitution grants the Federal government a limited ability to interact with "the people". It in no way grants rights to the people, they already have all of them. it allows small intrusions into them. People have a right to privacy. It is 
    innate. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the government has the ability to preemptively violate that privacy. Any such legislation you propose is blatantly unconstitutional. Will the government accept financial responsibility for breaches? They are inevitable.

    Additionally it is unrealistic. It is as functional as saying all cars must be manufactured with a catalytic converter. And applying it to electric cars as well. And race cars. And failing to recognize that individuals can purchase a bypass pipe and install it. The vast majority won't bother of course. But the outlaws will. Similarly if a device has a backdoor built into it, third parties will just create standalone programs that render the built-in security moot by providing their own security. And it will be peer to peer unbreakable within reasonable timeframes. Such apps exist now. The proposed legislation does nothing to prevent their use or creation. It is pure politics where the politicians argue only for the purpose of personal political gain, not for safeguarding the public in any way. And it shows a contempt for the people, and contempt for the constitution. It is pure overreach.


    icoco3
  • Reply 53 of 72
    iSRSiSRS Posts: 47member
    icoco3 said:
    frac said:
    ...
    On Fortune, they're saying that Feinstein is naming this the Freedom Bill  :'(
    Freedom to spy on the public?

    How they vote is going to come up again this fall for those who are up for re-election.  That includes all of the House.  Remind them of that when you contact your representatives.
    I have done the same. Sadly, people in this country no longer vote for a person based on their ideas or what they have/have not done in the past.

    They've picked a team ([R] or [D]) and stick to it.

    Which is why these crazy laws can even see the light of day in the first place.

    It used to be that not serving the best interest of you constituency got you fired or voted out. Now it is all about the "party line"
  • Reply 54 of 72
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    Feinstein - what an idiot. Here you are representing the heart and soul of technology in Silicon Valley and you pull a moronic stunt like this. Its time for you to go!!!!!
  • Reply 55 of 72
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    rbonner said:
    "It's just that I have a basic fundamental belief this is very important and that no American company should be above the law," Feinstein said regarding her proposal.
    This seems like a circular argument. If this is worrisome, then create a law that insists that there are no backdoors. I do like the wording, that the company has to be the one that keeps the backdoor, at least that means it can be only used when directed by the courts.
    Which would make it a joke! This has been hashed over again and again and again. There is no way, once created, that you could limit its use. Period. Every government in the world, including those with little to no regard for human rights, would demand its use in their respective jurisdictions. This is absolute stupidity. It is time to get these morons out of office!
  • Reply 56 of 72
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member

    What's so misleading is this bill is being introduced as human trafficking legislation. This is what Assembly Member Jim Cooper said of this bill:

     “Full-disk encrypted operating systems provide criminals an invaluable tool to prey on women, children, and threaten our freedoms while making the legal process of judicial court orders, useless.” 

    http://asmdc.org/members/a09/news-room/press-releases/cooper-introduces-human-trafficking-evidentiary-access-legislation

    Apple really needs to start doing more to increase public awareness about encryption because the public is easily manipulated. The government campaign against Apple is making people believe they support terrorists. This new bill introduced in California will start pushing the idea that Apple supports human trafficking too. 
    The absurdity of all of this is that we spend 10's if not 100's of BILLIONS a year on national security. What did these clowns do before smartphones? They did their jobs with the tools they had. And that is what we should expect from them now. If they can't do their job effectively with their current resources, we need to find new people to run our national and local law enforcement and security operations. The government can't even protect their own data and they want us to make ours less secure? Time for all to stand and tell them to fk off! Do your jobs with what you have or resign so competent people can take over.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 57 of 72
    metrixmetrix Posts: 256member
    Ask friends and family to contact Senator Dianne Feinstein's office and complain, I did.

    (415) 393-0707
  • Reply 58 of 72
    rbonner said:
    "It's just that I have a basic fundamental belief this is very important and that no American company should be above the law," Feinstein said regarding her proposal.
    This seems like a circular argument. If this is worrisome, then create a law that insists that there are no backdoors. I do like the wording, that the company has to be the one that keeps the backdoor, at least that means it can be only used when directed by the courts.
    Oddly, Apple isn't doing anything illegal to be considered "above the law" Many, many times the demands of law enforcement are not even legal to begin with. On the other hand, demanding backdoors may go against several federal interstate banking laws and HIPAA. 
  • Reply 59 of 72
    pigybankpigybank Posts: 178member
    Apple should threaten to move all operations out of California and to cease sale of all Apple products within the state. Other large tech companies should follow a similar lead. 
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 60 of 72
    gonevwgonevw Posts: 45member
    "It's just that I have a basic fundamental belief this is very important and that no American company should be above the law,"

    ...so there is no current law so you're going to make one?! Wtf
    razorpitSpamSandwich
Sign In or Register to comment.