DOJ formalizes request for encryption back-doors

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    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
    Before Obama it was Bush, and before that Clinton: Clipper Chip initiative, export restrictions on crypto, 40bit SSL for outside the US...

    It’s the entire corrupt national security apparatus which thinks to be entitled to derive a right to easy data access from a windfall shortcoming in old technology, that didn’t exist before and is going away now.
    cy_starkmanbaconstangmrstep
  • Reply 42 of 53
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Hmmm ... maybe only until the DOJ and the other Eyes show they're incompetent at keeping key stores away from the bad guys.

    After that, back to end-to-end encryption.

    Also, I want to see evidence after a year about what criminal or terrorist activity has been curtailed due to the government back door.

    If the government can't clearly demonstrate that their back door has proven efficacious, they shouldn't be allow to keep it.

    Basically this means that they should have to prove that a back door yields positive, tangible results - if they can't do that, they shouldn't have the continued ability to invade our privacy. This should be written into the legislation making this a requirement.

    If they can't get such legislation passed, they can go pound sand. We are after all, a society of laws and not a kingdom of decrees.
    No need: we know what the PATRIOT act resulted in: zero prevented terrorist attacks, but a whole bunch of small time criminals, like low level drug dealers and prostitutes in jail. It won’t be any different this time.

    Next they’ll want location data, with the same excuse.
    They yell about how horrible China is, while doing everything in their power to catch up and out-China China in their surveillance capabilities.
    Oferbaconstang
  • Reply 43 of 53
    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.
    And stacking a court is constitutional?
    Setting aside whether it's good politics or good policy, stacking or packing the court is clearly Constitutional.  The Constitution doesn't even hint at how many justices should be on the Supreme Court or how many lesser federal courts and judges there should be.  The Constitution implements zero restrictions on who can be on the Supreme Court or how the President should select them.
    tmayjdb8167Ofercy_starkmanbaconstangmrstep
  • Reply 44 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).
    I think it’s more a case of ‘don’t give them an inch or they’ll take a mile’. No company should agree to even one bit of this nonsense.
  • Reply 45 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?
    Only Thomas Massie is one other rep I’m aware of who identifies as a Libertarian while also being Republican. Libertarians have never been and never will be in the driver’s seat, unless the US collapses completely.
  • Reply 46 of 53
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    MacPro said:
    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
    mmm... Obama vs Barr in regard to their knowledge of Constitutional Law... not a close contest!  ;)
    Yep. The Constitution is just a piece of paper to Obama. He had no problems weaponizing the DOJ and the IRS.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 47 of 53
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    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).
    Never give the federal government an inch. No matter what it is they will always walk away with a mile and you’ll have a sore rear wondering what the hell just happened.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 48 of 53
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    Why do these people never learn?

    It’s not just this administration either. This has been going on forever. Arrogance, ignorance, irresponsibility, authoritarianism, and then, ultimately: Laziness.
    baconstang
  • Reply 49 of 53
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 934member
    What a crock. NSA has lost “Crown Jewels” hacker tools in the recent past. Anything made as a “door” (back door is idiocy, it’s a vulnerability plain and simple) will be discovered and exploited. 

    Ridiculous as so much of the world economy now depends on security. 
    baconstang
  • Reply 50 of 53
    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
    You're right this didn't start with Barr. But what makes this administration's attitude so puzzling is that this administration is unabashedly in support of gun rights. This administration refuses to endorse gun control of any kind on principle on the grounds that gun control encumbers law-abiding citizens' right to bear arms. The Obama administration was not so anti-gun control

    It never ceases to amaze me that an administration that is so worried about creating encumbrances on our right to bear arms would openly support encumbering our right to privacy and our right to safeguard our electronic communications.
    baconstang
  • Reply 51 of 53
    I'm sure the DOJ is itching to use a back door to bust up the governor-napping militias and crazy folks like Q-anon.... Right?

    Just kidding.
  • Reply 52 of 53
    My reaction is the same as dwights here:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v2lwdvydNsw&t=1m20s
Sign In or Register to comment.