DOJ formalizes request for encryption back-doors

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 53
    This is an issue where both the tech companies and the government have valid concerns. I agree with people that say the current administration doesn't have any credibility when it comes to pushing for changes here. Way too many examples of failure to comply with lawful requests and subpoenas for information from Congress etc. Hard for the public to get behind this when the highest levels of government consistently choose a double-standard for themselves. 
  • Reply 22 of 53
    ITGUYINSD said:
    Good ol' Bill Barr.  Can't wait until JAN 2021.  Buh-bye!
    I don't think that this viewpoint that the DOJ has presented is going to change, regardless of who's in charge.
    Accurate. Every AG acts in a manner consistent with benefitting the Federal government.
    inTIMidatorrazorpit
  • Reply 23 of 53
    Incidentally, what’s the rationale behind the HUGE uptick of AAPL this morning? A 5% gain is massive. Must be advance word leaked to Wall Street traders about what will be revealed.
    edited October 2020
  • Reply 24 of 53
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,078member
    ITGUYINSD said:
    Good ol' Bill Barr.  Can't wait until JAN 2021.  Buh-bye!
    I don't think that this viewpoint that the DOJ has presented is going to change, regardless of who's in charge.
    That’s right. This isn’t about Republicans vs Democrats or conservatives vs liberals, it’s about libertarians vs authoritarians.
    SpamSandwichgatorguyrazorpit
  • Reply 25 of 53
    Sorry for another post...

    If you, the federal government demand to access to our privacy and encrypted data via backdoor... 

    THEN WE AMERICAN DEMAND YOU, OUR GOVERNMENTS, TO INSTALL OUR BACKDOOR TO ACCESS THE ENTIRE OF YOUR TOP SECRET STUFF!!! 

    NO? THEN LEAVE US THE FUCKING ALONE!


    Ofer
  • Reply 26 of 53
    carnegie said: That’s right. This isn’t about Republicans vs Democrats or conservatives vs liberals, it’s about libertarians vs authoritarians.
    In the United States, the libertarians are the authoritarians. Their #1 priority for "liberty" is that citizens lose their Constitutional rights on private property. 
    Ofer
  • Reply 27 of 53
    Wasn't there a report just a while back, which said that even after all of the spying done by NSA, they failed to stop even 1 attack. 

    What will this accomplish?
  • Reply 28 of 53
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,285member
    lam92103 said:
    Wasn't there a report just a while back, which said that even after all of the spying done by NSA, they failed to stop even 1 attack. 

    What will this accomplish?
    https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1100/WR1113/RAND_WR1113.pdf
    https://fsi-live.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/start_comparingfailedfoiledcompletedsuccessfulterroristattacks_dec2017.pdf
    edited October 2020
  • Reply 29 of 53
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,956member
    We have experience in back doors and 'secret' keys in the past. Secrets never stay secret and it wasn't long before the secret key was public knowledge.

    Having said that, I recognize that there are legitimate and legal law enforcement interests in breaking encryption. The only ways I can see this working would if the encryption wasn't end to end and the data was on some secure server somewhere, in which case it would only be as secure as the people who have access to it. The other option I can think of is if there was some sort of rotating soft key that could be revoked. That would theoretically reduce/eliminate the problems of keys getting out while still allowing appropriate access.
  • Reply 30 of 53
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,285member
    MplsP said:
    We have experience in back doors and 'secret' keys in the past. Secrets never stay secret and it wasn't long before the secret key was public knowledge.

    Having said that, I recognize that there are legitimate and legal law enforcement interests in breaking encryption. The only ways I can see this working would if the encryption wasn't end to end and the data was on some secure server somewhere, in which case it would only be as secure as the people who have access to it. The other option I can think of is if there was some sort of rotating soft key that could be revoked. That would theoretically reduce/eliminate the problems of keys getting out while still allowing appropriate access.
    The British proposed being added in the background as an invisible party to an encrypted communication. It's something Apple apparently already has a method for that could be slightly modified so that the ones having a conversation would not know they were being listened to. Look up the UK's "Ghost plan" which doesn't require any backdoors that involves breaking encryption.
    edited October 2020 roundaboutnow
  • Reply 31 of 53
    Look what Comes and Mueller did, using a spurious Dossier as "evidence" to expand their investigations. What makes anyone believe the government will not use similar tactics to  head for the back doors on mobile devices and desktop computers?

    The "back door" has been the goal of the FBI and Secret Service for at least two decades. Now, they're calling in the bigger guns, along with forcing the NSA to reveal intercepts from both friendly and and enemy, even before really qualified intelligence analysts have had a chance to evaluate the validity and reliability of the sources. The FBI and  Secret service are "Law EnforcemenT trained. They are not really trained in the Intelligence business. 
    Unfortunately, neither the FBI or Secret Service can keep secrets. Giving them a "back door" is akin to giving them power to tap your phones and read your First Class mail without you knowing they've done it. 
    SpamSandwichinTIMidatormrsteprazorpit
  • Reply 32 of 53
    mrstepmrstep Posts: 515member
    gatorguy said:
    rob53 said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    Good ol' Bill Barr.  Can't wait until JAN 2021.  Buh-bye!
    I don't think that this viewpoint that the DOJ has presented is going to change, regardless of who's in charge.
    You can think that all you want but Barr is not your normal AG. Once he's gone, we can start clearing out the garbage and make sure the people who get installed are following the Constitution and laws, something Barr doesn't know anything about.
    This didn't start with Barr. The Obama administration attempted to do it too a decade ago Maybe 2010 Obama and his 2015 FBI didn't know anything about the Constitution and laws either, certainly believable. 
    https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/tech-giants-urge-obama-to-resist-backdoors-into-encrypted-communications/2015/05/18/11781b4a-fd69-11e4-833c-a2de05b6b2a4_story.html
    Without a doubt.  Clinton was pushing for it with the Clipper Chip as well years before that, and Bush gave us the Patriot Act in the first place after that, and Obama - after campaigning on fixing the violations of our 4th Amendment rights - doubled down on expanding the illegal surveillance programs.

    Ironically, the only positive step in recent years regarding our privacy has been Trump not extending the FISA provisions because his campaign was spied on.  Along those lines, the only chance for any of these types of overreach being stopped are for the politicians who are making and passing these laws to have their own privacy violated*.  That seems to be a lesson they can understand - sometimes**.

    But rob53 this isn't (just) a Barr thing, hate to tell you. Whoever else might come in is going to keep pushing for this as well.


    * Unless they've already have enough spying done on them to where they can't actually oppose things.  If it's not "you did xyz", it probably wouldn't take much more than "it would be a shame for these 5 friends and relatives to be arrested" to buy a little cooperation or silence.

     ** The CIA spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee’s computers - and Brennan eventually showing up to 'apologize' for it after initially saying "nothing could be further from the truth" - did nothing in terms of fixing that, so see (*) again - who knows what dirt they have on various Senators.  I'd say it sounds paranoid, but I'm really not sure what other great explanations there are for our elected representatives going along with this for decades.  Snowden released the details of the illegal programs, and he's the only one in trouble for it.
    edited October 2020 GG1razorpitcy_starkman
  • Reply 33 of 53
    When the government uses back-doored encryption for its own “top secret”& above security needs, then, and only then, will I consider it. Until then, this is nothing more than yet another double standard between the political class & everyone else. Hard pass.
    edited October 2020 Grayeagle
  • Reply 34 of 53
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 1,070member
    Maybe the DOJ should be the test subject for this.  They could do it for a year to see how it’s going, then decide if it’s good enough for the rest of the country.
    Ofer
  • Reply 35 of 53
    NaiyasNaiyas Posts: 107member
    carnegie said: That’s right. This isn’t about Republicans vs Democrats or conservatives vs liberals, it’s about libertarians vs authoritarians.
    In the United States, the libertarians are the authoritarians. Their #1 priority for "liberty" is that citizens lose their Constitutional rights on private property. 
    I don't think it's unique to any one country. There is always a sizeable minority that refer to themselves as "libertarian" but will only listen to those that agree with them. They then seek to impose their "libertarian" view upon everyone through any tools available - abolition of privacy for the sake of protecting you, etc, etc. In the end it doesn't matter what they call themselves: libertarian, liberal, populist, conservative, communist, fascist, ALL of them without fail end up as authoritarian at the extreme.

    Because of this simple historical fact it is imperative that "we the people" retain control of government and protect ourselves through use of tools like encryption. Governments should be scared of the people, not the other way around, and it should be up to the people to determine if the requested erosion of their liberties is a price worth paying for any, so called, benefit for protection. So far as I can tell the rise of mass encryption hasn't lead to any meaningful increase in crime so the governments wanting this have a long way to go to convince me, for one, otherwise.
    GG1razorpitOfer
  • Reply 36 of 53
    Apple and others should bite the bullet and say "ok let's work together to see if we can solve this impossible problem."  And when they can't say:  "Sorry.  We tried.  As you said protecting privacy is critical and we, collectively--you were at the table--couldn't develop a solution."  That'll at least take the pressure off for a few years and avoids the bad optics of Apple looking like they don't care about those child predators (who clearly are a global security risk).
    Ofer
  • Reply 37 of 53
    zimmiezimmie Posts: 651member
    razorpit said:
    The second our federal government has a back door we’re done. These people can’t even keep social security numbers private. Who in their right mind thinks they could manage something like this?
    Social security numbers aren't supposed to be private. This is why it's deeply dumb banks use them like they're some kind of authenticating information about a person. They are an ID, like a name, or a driver license number.

    More relevantly, as I said earlier this year, they couldn't keep the TSA master keys secret. Some goon with copies held them up at a press conference. As a direct result of their carelessness, you can now download STLs to fabricate your own TSA master keys. 1620 keys cost a little more than they did back in June, but not a lot, and they're no harder to find.

    This will make citizens of Five Eyes countries less safe.
    Ofer
  • Reply 38 of 53
    Incidentally, what’s the rationale behind the HUGE uptick of AAPL this morning? A 5% gain is massive. Must be advance word leaked to Wall Street traders about what will be revealed.
    My guess: "Buy on the rumor, sell on the news."  It's closer to 7% now.
    Ofer
  • Reply 39 of 53
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    Oh fuck that. Whenever they want to push through totalitarian laws, they come with tear jerkers as “sexually exploited children” or “terrorists”. As if spy agencies, like the five eyes, ever gave a fuck about children. Heck, they will partake in narcotics trade or sex trafficking, if it can fund some black ops without scrutiny from civil oversight.

    Law enforcement, you lazy fucks, investigate the old fashioned way, with shoe leather and undercover work, planting bugs, search warrants etc. instead thinking you can do investigations by sitting at a desk spying on the public while stuffing your fat faces with donuts.

    Apple should move its HQ to Iceland or some other encryption friendly jurisdiction and tell five eyes to go poke themselves.
    Oferbaconstang
  • Reply 40 of 53
    carnegie said: That’s right. This isn’t about Republicans vs Democrats or conservatives vs liberals, it’s about libertarians vs authoritarians.
    In the United States, the libertarians are the authoritarians. Their #1 priority for "liberty" is that citizens lose their Constitutional rights on private property. 
    Huh?  Who are these "libertarians" of whom you speak?  Besides Rand Paul what public figures use that label?
    SpamSandwich
Sign In or Register to comment.