I’m a supporter of Barr and have a great deal of respect for him, but I’m not sure I agree with him here. It depends on what kind of backstory we’re talking about. If it’s simply something that allows the product manufacturers to access encrypted data under legal warrants and orders, that’s one thing. If it’s a backdoor the government can access directly as long as it “super dooper totally promises not to abuse it,” we have a major problem.
Barr what about the voting machines? Those didn't have strong encryptions and look where we are now.....
That’s silly. No voting machines were hacked.
Yeah, that's why I questioned it too. There have been some proof-of-concept hacks of voting machine systems at those hack-a-thon type events, I think. But, there has also been a ton of confused media propaganda, making it sound like elections have been hacked. I was trying to figure out if they knew of something, or have just been impacted by the propaganda.
I’d be more inclined to give an ear to the government’s position if it would include a law that any agency must (within some specified time-period) inform each and every investigated or tapped Citizen that the citizen had been investigated, including by what authority, date the investigation starts and date it ends and all material that the agency surveilled from the Citizen.
That’s totally unrealistic and would destroy the ability to conduct legal surveillance. If the targets know, they will change their behavior.
I’m a supporter of Barr and have a great deal of respect for him, but I’m not sure I agree with him here. It depends on what kind of backstory we’re talking about. If it’s simply something that allows the product manufacturers to access encrypted data under legal warrants and orders, that’s one thing. If it’s a backdoor the government can access directly as long as it “super dooper totally promises not to abuse it,” we have a major problem.
I think we have a problem either way. That kind of thing always gets abused, or hacked later on. Comey was strongly suggesting that kind of thing, too (ie: end-to-end encryption with a door in the middle... which really isn't end-to-end encryption any more. He even suggested it still be advertised as end-to-end, as it effectively appears that way to the end users.)
I’d be more inclined to give an ear to the government’s position if it would include a law that any agency must (within some specified time-period) inform each and every investigated or tapped Citizen that the citizen had been investigated, including by what authority, date the investigation starts and date it ends and all material that the agency surveilled from the Citizen.
That’s totally unrealistic and would destroy the ability to conduct legal surveillance. If the targets know, they will change their behavior.
It isn't unrealistic. The time-period could be long, or could be held off during an active investigation or something. Citizen targets SHOULD know, eventually, especially if the case is tossed out or the "target" wasn't charged. What I am looking for is a way to prevent Big-Brother from just watching everybody, or at least to inform everybody that Big Brother IS watching them. Yes sir, we need to bug everybody in Seattle because somebody in Seattle is a bad dude. Oh look. These 20 people are conspiring to run against our governor. let's just use what we recorded last week against them and blow them out of the election. This is what I want to prevent. If the FBI or LAPD is forced to tell us that we were being wired-tapped (or WhatsApp spied on) (for no good reason) then we'll know they are abusing their power and we'll vote somebody into office who'll charge the bad agents or at least fire them.
I’m a supporter of Barr and have a great deal of respect for him, but I’m not sure I agree with him here. It depends on what kind of backstory we’re talking about. If it’s simply something that allows the product manufacturers to access encrypted data under legal warrants and orders, that’s one thing. If it’s a backdoor the government can access directly as long as it “super dooper totally promises not to abuse it,” we have a major problem.
If anyone other than the owner of the data has access to it, then it’s not secure.
What if those OS created by US tech firms start having backdoors and then the world shifts to another OS created by non-US?
the previous era of mobile OS wasn’t from US. What happens if the next big thing isn’t from US? How about a new era where mobile devices are dominated by Chinese, including the OS? How about Israel (where most hacking/cracking tools are coming out from) one day dominates ability to break any encryption?
Yet "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." (Thomas Jefferson)
The cost of ensuring proper security for all communications is paid in blood. We as a global society need to make a decision about how much blood can acceptably be spilled in the defence of this particular liberty. There is room for disagreement and negotiation, but the weakening of security for all has its own costs that should be taken into account.
These outdated individuals should just retire and get younger people with common sense and basic knowledge about tech in Gov.
But they won’t. Not only do these old fools want to maintain power for as long as possible, most of the in-house expertise has been cut out of the government, and such things have been deemed inappropriate by the “small government” politicians. Everything is outsourced to “the private sector”. Only the ignorant power-hungry old men are left, dictating orders and demands to make their jobs as lazy as possible.
Forcing product manufacturers to install mechanisms that allow government authorities to forcibly and surreptitiously install government surveillance agents into the private and personal space of private citizens is paramount to the government forcing private citizens to quarter soldiers in their homes. This is in clear violation of the third amendment to the US Constitution, if anyone gives a crap about that little thing anymore. I do.
Not sure where this clown went to school, but our nation was founded upon the concept that our rights are intrinsic to our humanity- they were not granted by any king or government and cannot be abrogated by any king or government. The proper role of the government and its officials is to defend those rights and to respect them.
He might also be advised that all power held by any government comes from and with the consent of the governed- that would be the citizenry. The same document that describes those concepts states that it is the right of the citizen to abolish and replace any government that becomes abusive of those rights.
The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously regarding warrantless intrusion into cell phones and the opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts put it quite plainly- get a warrant. This is not a controversial position from either the liberal or conservative wing of American politics.
What the donut patrol ( law enforcement) wants is to surveil you 24/7/365 without a warrant. They want you without rights, without a lawyer and well able to incriminate yourself. That violates the most basic precepts of our democracy and republic.
Us Barr a communist? Has he read the book “1984”? Does Barr want U.S. to be a police state? Does Barr want to eavesdrop everyone’s conversation too?
Sort of... Perhaps he has been watching too many re-runs of CSI, NCIS and other cop shows where everything about a perp is available withing 5 minutes from the Internet etc etc and that he thinks that they are real. Can someone please tell him that they are fiction?
I’d be more inclined to give an ear to the government’s position if it would include a law that any agency must (within some specified time-period) inform each and every investigated or tapped Citizen that the citizen had been investigated, including by what authority, date the investigation starts and date it ends and all material that the agency surveilled from the Citizen.
That’s totally unrealistic and would destroy the ability to conduct legal surveillance. If the targets know, they will change their behavior.
Back in the bad old days of the STASI in East Germany everyone knew that they were being spied on yet life went on. It had to.
Perhaps this is the new utopia that Barr and friends want for the USA? Those who drafted the constitution will be turning in their graves at how far their ideals have been twisted.
I thought this was a solved case - any encryption with limited-length key (256 bit) can be brute-force hacked if really needed as in tracing actual terrorists, while the very high cost makes this method useless to criminals. And I heard that’s the reason all internet traffic is encrypted by 256bit keys while nothing prevents us from using like 16000bit ones. Does police want to have their cake and eat it too, as in cheap mass surveillance?
The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously regarding warrantless intrusion into cell phones and the opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts put it quite plainly- get a warrant. This is not a controversial position from either the liberal or conservative wing of American politics.
What the donut patrol ( law enforcement) wants is to surveil you 24/7/365 without a warrant. They want you without rights, without a lawyer and well able to incriminate yourself. That violates the most basic precepts of our democracy and republic.
Is that really the issue being talked about? Currently law enforcement cannot surveil any of these encrypted apps even if they have a warrant.
I am not sure who it is that I trust less: The criminals, the hackers, the terrorists -- or the U.S. Justice Department. None of them seem to much respect for the law.
Comments
the previous era of mobile OS wasn’t from US. What happens if the next big thing isn’t from US? How about a new era where mobile devices are dominated by Chinese, including the OS? How about Israel (where most hacking/cracking tools are coming out from) one day dominates ability to break any encryption?
(although he was apparently discussing the application of a special tax to landowners so that attacks by Indians and French forces could be suitably defended against: https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/how-the-world-butchered-benjamin-franklins-quote-on-liberty-vs-security/)
Yet "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." (Thomas Jefferson)
The cost of ensuring proper security for all communications is paid in blood. We as a global society need to make a decision about how much blood can acceptably be spilled in the defence of this particular liberty. There is room for disagreement and negotiation, but the weakening of security for all has its own costs that should be taken into account.
He might also be advised that all power held by any government comes from and with the consent of the governed- that would be the citizenry. The same document that describes those concepts states that it is the right of the citizen to abolish and replace any government that becomes abusive of those rights.
The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously regarding warrantless intrusion into cell phones and the opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts put it quite plainly- get a warrant. This is not a controversial position from either the liberal or conservative wing of American politics.
What the donut patrol ( law enforcement) wants is to surveil you 24/7/365 without a warrant. They want you without rights, without a lawyer and well able to incriminate yourself. That violates the most basic precepts of our democracy and republic.
The backdoors are already in. Have been for a while.
Then the researchers find them as “vulnerabilities,” it becomes public knowledge, then the companies patch while opening up a hole elsewhere.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
So what's the real reason for it?