FBI director calls for restart of smartphone encryption debate

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 65
    dmdevdmdev Posts: 31member
    Sorry Comey, as an issue encryption has already affected us. We need to protect ourselves, and that, alone, is a national security issue. End of story
    palominepbrstreetg
  • Reply 42 of 65
    cintoscintos Posts: 113member
    Well, he is starting the discussion by declaring his ignorance: "he did understand why Apple chose litigation as a venue to start the conversation." It is well documented that Apple started the discussion about the San Bernardino iPhone by giving the FBI immediate access to the information they had. THEN, in a press release, the FBI & DOJ blindsided Apple by slapping them with a court order to create a govOS version if iOS. Last I looked, that FBI court order is the very definition of "starting litigation". So Mr. Director, who started the litigation????
    fracpscooter63palominelatifbpration alAni
  • Reply 43 of 65
    joogabahjoogabah Posts: 118member
    zebra said:
    I just don't understand the logic of this discussion.

    Assuming 100% of all smart phones had zero encryption, there would always be many third party applications that encrypt messages on the fly. Many of them are free and quite effective. Most such developers are not subject to American law. I see no way to stop them. So why burden iOS or Android with laws designed to weaken encryption? Such restrictions the FBI and other authorities want defy logic.

    What am I missing?
    Capitalism is breaking down and they have no solution, and history predicts the working masses will revolt to institute a fairer system (because workers face the brunt of the breakdown), so the ruling classes stage false flag attacks, expand spying on their own populations and start wars to scare people into submission and head off any opposition.  Nazis did the same thing.  Any run of the mill Marxist saw this coming years ago, through all the triumphalist "end of history" bullcrap when the Wall fell.  Just because the Soviet Union was totalitarian it does not follow that capitalism is permanent or even viable.  The extent of the historical opposition to capitalism would seem to suggest otherwise.
    aylkstourque
  • Reply 44 of 65
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    cintos said:
    Well, he is starting the discussion by declaring his ignorance: "he did understand why Apple chose litigation as a venue to start the conversation." It is well documented that Apple started the discussion about the San Bernardino iPhone by giving the FBI immediate access to the information they had. THEN, in a press release, the FBI & DOJ blindsided Apple by slapping them with a court order to create a govOS version if iOS. Last I looked, that FBI court order is the very definition of "starting litigation". So Mr. Director, who started the litigation????
    Sad that I have to come to page 3 of comments to find the first person who exhibits some medium term memory facility. You are quite right. Apple and the FBI were already 'in conversation' about the San Bernardino iPhone. They could have asked Apple to explain the consequences of resetting the pw....but they didn't. Comey is exhibiting delusional behavior, by actually quoting Tim Cook's reaction to the court order...
    "“[I]f I have a relationship with you, and I decide one day I’m going to sue you, I’m a country boy at the end of the day: I’m going to pick up the phone and tell you I’m going to sue you,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said in a Time cover story published Thursday."
    It's  a Trump-like gambit. Get in first with disinformation to establish moral high ground even though it's demonstrably untrue. 
    ration alAni
  • Reply 45 of 65
    Speechless. I am literally speechless. All this b/c "someday, encrypted data will matter in some terrorist event.... someday." Ok, let's be hypothetical here. Let's say terrorists / criminals stop using phones b/c of governments being able to break the encryption, and they instead use paper notes to pass messages. If they burn these notes, are we then going to require paper to be made that can be "un-burned?" I know that sounds ridiculous, but that's my point. It is ridiculous. It's not about safety. It never was about safety. If it was about safety, then he / the FBI would have come to the opposite conclusion after breaking the encryption revealed nothing useful. Only a few types of people keep trying for something if they didn't succeed at first. Someone who is insane is one, someone who is looking for a reason is another. They want a reason to do this. They want info, b/c that's the currency in Government these days. Info is power. And for people who don't care about it saying "I have nothing to hide," neither do I. But with power comes corruption, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The patriot act was abused by local law enforcement across the country to deal with non terrorism threats. So was PRISM. And on and on. It's about power. Power like that CAN and WILL be abused. Especially in this case. If there was a system in place with transparency, where freedom of information act inquiries can get info, with real warrants (not these NSA letters and secret FISA court warrant BS), then fine. BUT ONLY if there is oversight, publicly available transparent oversight. Not this man behind the curtain nothing to see here we have the best intentions wink wink nod nod trust us we're Uncle Sam and whatever else you can think of to throw onto this run on ranting sentence that has become a godawful atrocity of grammar. Whew, that was a long one, but I think I made my point. It'll never happen, but you give me regular constitutional warrants and transparent oversight, and I'll listen to what you say, James Comey. Thank GOD my post wasn't one of those emotionally, politically, charged rants like some people leave!!! Wait a second...
    pbrstreetgAni
  • Reply 46 of 65
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    apple ][ said:
    And something terrible is no doubt going to happen sooner rather than later, and I do not give a crap if the FBI can not hack into any phones. Something terrible happens approximately every 86 hours in Europe, sucks to be them I guess. B)
    So if I said "Something terrible happens with a school shooting in the US every 85 minutes, sucks to be an American school kid" that would also be cool and clever?
    aylkpalominestourquepbrstreetgAni
  • Reply 47 of 65
    davidwdavidw Posts: 977member
    stourque said:
    apple ][ said:
    Your man Trump was all in favour of forcing Apple to provide a back door for their encryption, and he even called for a boycott of Apple. Just wondering what exactly you stand for. Either you're with Apple or you're with Trump.


    No quite right. DT was in favor of the court order ordering Apple to access the terrorist iPhone. No where did he actually state that he is in favor of Apple providing government with a back door to their encryption. I not even sure is DT even understand what that means. Even the courts and the FBI publicly stated that the court order was not asking Apple to provide them with a back door to their encryption, just access for this one iPhone. But most of us here (not all) knew better and understood that the FBI and the courts was essentially asking Apple to provide them with a back door. It wasn't hard for most of us to understand this but it would be asking a lot to expect DT to understand this.

    DT was caught up with the uniformed masses that just wanted Apple to break into the terrorist iPhone, without knowing or even capable of understanding, all the detail involve of what the FBI was really after with that court order. So saying that DT is in favor of government forcing tech to provide back doors to encryption, just base on the fact that he wanted Apple to obey that court order, is not a real indicator that that's what he will do if elected. 

    That's not to say the DT is against government forcing  tech to provide back door to their encryption. He has never actually stated that either. But Clinton also has never actually stated that she is against back doors or is on Apple side when it comes to back doors and encryption. Her vague answers concerning back doors and encryption points to her wanting tech and government to work together to come up with a solution and most likely that means a back door of some sort.

    So even it you're with Apple, it doesn't mean you're with Clinton either. 
    edited August 2016
  • Reply 48 of 65
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,189member
    zebra said:
    I just don't understand the logic of this discussion.

    Assuming 100% of all smart phones had zero encryption, there would always be many third party applications that encrypt messages on the fly. Many of them are free and quite effective. Most such developers are not subject to American law. I see no way to stop them. So why burden iOS or Android with laws designed to weaken encryption? Such restrictions the FBI and other authorities want defy logic.

    What am I missing?
    If the U.S. Government forced Apple to put a backdoor into the phone, what countries would outright BAN the iPhone and what others would only allow it if they can get that same access? Who wants their citizen's spied on by the U.S. Government? That's really what it comes down to. We already had this war. Congress already did their job. Breaking into a phone after a terrorists does their job didn't stop anything, but we should all just give up our rights and protections because of it? https://backchannel.com/why-are-we-fighting-the-crypto-wars-again-b5310a423295#.gpl8gnxxm
    palomine
  • Reply 49 of 65
    latifbplatifbp Posts: 544member
    crowley said:
    How is that not encouraging a foreign entity to engage in espionage?
    If you’re unable to parse the context and content of two sentences, the statements which explain to children exactly what was said have been long posted. But you know that. You’re perfectly capable of finding them. But you know that, too. And the DNC’s own response shows that the deleted e-mails weren’t “personal” in content. You also know that. You just don’t give a fuck.

    No wonder you’re so confused, anyway. Look at all the fucking conditionals I had to put on my (time-limited) search to get the damn thing to give me factual information: 
    And why do I have to do that? Because leftist-owned shitholes don’t even show up when you search for the title of the PDF I posted earlier. Every one of the above use variations on claims of future tense action, not past tense. But, of course, that’s to be expected from the DNC leaks (BUT RUSSIA INVENTED THOSE TOO IT’S ALL RUSSIA BETTER BOMB THEM!) which prove the media’s owned by the DNC or vice versa.

    But I was extremely pleased (and surprised, hence the mention) by the BBC’s initial coverage thereof. It seems that Britons, of all people, would certainly be able to read their own language and be able to see THE TENSE OF THE SPOKEN SENTENCES. CNN, even, in one article, was wholly unbiased, using “called on Russian agencies to find” rather than “to hack.” Something makes me feel that the global crow population will go extinct when Assange does his next leak…
    It's Gary Johnson's time
  • Reply 50 of 65
    latifbplatifbp Posts: 544member
    crowley said:
    Clearly bullshit, honey, a transparent attempt to rewrite a stupid statement since that's not what Trump said at all.  Trump didn't mention the FBI, and even if he did, it's irrelevant.  Whatever the motivation, he is openly inviting Russia to hack into an American political party's email.  That's outside influence, and collusion with a nation that it would not be untoward to describe as belligerent and hostile to US interests.

    Treasonous.  Given your history in being uncommonly lax about the definition of the word treason I think this more than fits your bill.

    Mike Pence is not Donald Trump.  I don't give a damn what Mike Pence said after the fact, and he didn't directly address what Trump said anyway, just engaged in some distraction.  We're talking about Trump, what Trump said, and your abject denial of his actual words.  I pasted them up there.  Right up there.  Look, I'll paste them again:

    "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.  I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

    Refute these actual words.  Not via Jason Miller or Mike Pence, but those actual words, by Donald Trump, that directly and explicitly encourage Russia to hack into a US political party's email.

    Damn wrong I give a fuck.  If the emails were personal then inviting Russia to hack into them would be bad.  If they're not personal then that's an order of magnitude worse.  Just because you want to know what's in someone's email doesn't make inviting Russia to break in any measure of ok.  Take some responsibility for your clown candidate's irresponsibility.

    Also, I don't think the response shows that at all.  It's a criticism of Trump, not an admission of anything.  Your interpretation of words appears to be broken.

    Rant rant, rah, rah, don't care.

    I don't even know why you posted that PDF.  What does a US-Russian treaty have to do with anything?

    stourquecrowleypbrstreetg
  • Reply 51 of 65
    Translation: Oh snit! Did you see all the new security features Apple added in iOS 10?  This is going to make our job a lot harder and erode our power.  We better pass a law before people get used to having privacy again.
    pbrstreetgSpamSandwich
  • Reply 52 of 65
    stourque said:
    apple ][ said:
    Your man Trump was all in favour of forcing Apple to provide a back door for their encryption, and he even called for a boycott of Apple. Just wondering what exactly you stand for. Either you're with Apple or you're with Trump.
    Trump at least is honest about where he stands. Unlike Obama and his successor Hillary, who give lip service, yet put guys like Comey as head of the FBI and try to do the same thing Trump espouses. 

    Make no mistake, the Dems aren't any better on issues of privacy. They do pay better lip service and mind their manners better. But they aren't any better than Trump. 

    Assange of Wikileaks believes that Clinton will be worse than Trump when it comes to freedom of the press. 

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/assange-wikileaks-more-hillary-clinton-000000028.html

    Trump is a poor answer to the poor leadership issues of the nation. However, Clinton is absolutely no better and likely even worse. 

    I am pretty depressed about the state of politics. Both candidates are terrible. 
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 53 of 65
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    crowley said:
    a transparent attempt to rewrite
    Actual statement:
    And if it is Russia—which it’s probably not, nobody knows who it is—but if it is Russia, it’s really bad for a different reason, because it shows how little respect they have for our country, when they would hack into a major party and get everything. But it would be interesting to see—I will tell you this—Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
    And if it is Russia
    Referring to the release of DNC e-mails, which had just taken place. Had taken. Past tense. In the past. Already happened. Prior to the current date.
    t shows how little respect they have
    Have. At the present time, due to the events of the past.
    when they would hack
    Referring, again, to the claims that Russia is responsible for the hack and subsequent availability of the release of DNC e-mails. Note that this entire statement is predicated on an assumption put out by the DNC itself (along with “Russia created some of these e-mails from scratch” to try to hide their transgressions) that is yet to be proven (as with this). It could very well have been a mole or disaffected leftist in the DNC itself. I haven’t heard Assange mention anything to any effect (he probably wouldn’t).
    I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.
    I won’t even bother telling you that this statement refers to the aforementioned past tense (alleged) Russian hacking. I won’t even bother telling you that the NSA has the e-mails, too. Never mind that Google has some. I won’t even bother telling you that not just Russia, but other nations certainly have them, at least in part. You just don’t comprehend how sentences work together in a paragraph.
     I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
    And then this, of course, is Trump making a joke. But you’d probably think the media is actually impartial, so it went over your head, too.
    he is openly inviting Russia to hack
    Proved you wrong above.
    Given your history…
    …you’d think I would know what it implies and you’d listen to me when I say that’s not what’s happening here, but again, as always, you literally do not give a fuck about truth or objectivity. At all. You’re just a pathetic identity politics shill.
    …lax…
    The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
    Mike Pence is not Donald Trump.
    Congratulations, you exhibit a level of spatial awareness equal to that of a half year old infant.
    I don't give a damn
    Then you revoke your stake in the discussion and render your claims thereon null and void. Thanks for playing. Listen to what was said the FIRST time in the future and you won’t be wrong again.
    Refute these actual words.
    Did. Learn how to read the English language. Repeating this until you fucking get a clue.
    Take some responsibility for your clown candidate's irresponsibility.
    Nice strawmen. They’re irrelevant, though, and you know that, so get a fucking clue.
    Rant rant, rah, rah, don't care.
    Then you revoke your stake in the discussion and render your claims thereon null and void. Thanks for playing. Listen to what was said the FIRST time in the future and you won’t be wrong again.
    I don't even know why you posted that PDF.  What does a US-Russian treaty have to do with anything?
    Because it completely destroys your “argument”. Read the goddamn document.
    edited August 2016 gtrSpamSandwich
  • Reply 54 of 65
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,064member
    tallest skil said:

    No wonder you’re so confused, anyway. Look at all the fucking conditionals I had to put on my (time-limited) search to get the damn thing to give me factual information: 
    -latimes -politico -cnbc -fox -abcnews -vox -washingtonpost -npr -cbsnews -theguardian -dailycaller -nytimes -aljazeera -huffingtonpost -time.com -thinkprogress -thedailybeast
    And why do I have to do that? Because leftist-owned shitholes don’t even show up when you search for the title of the PDF I posted earlier. Every one of the above use variations on claims of future tense action, not past tense. But, of course, that’s to be expected from the DNC leaks (BUT RUSSIA INVENTED THOSE TOO IT’S ALL RUSSIA BETTER BOMB THEM!) which prove the media’s owned by the DNC or vice versa.
    https://lmddgtfy.net/?q=usa russia mutual legal assistance

    No conditionals. Second hit.  Try harder.
    pbrstreetgstourque
  • Reply 55 of 65
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    crowley said:
    Try harder.
    At reading what was written. You’re absolutely pathetic.
    gtr
  • Reply 56 of 65
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,064member
    crowley said:
    Try harder.
    At reading what was written. You’re absolutely pathetic.
    Aww babe, it's ok that you apparently can't search for a PDF using the title.  Here's a hint, if you want to find a PDF about a treaty between the USA and Russia for Mutual Legal Assistance, search for "usa russia treaty mutual legal assistance"

    Hey looky!  Google gives it as the first answer: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=usa+russia+treaty+mutual+legal+assistance

    And nary a leftist-owned shithole in sight


    I actually can't make head nor tail of what you're saying with this brain fart
    tallest skil said:

    Because leftist-owned shitholes don’t even show up when you search for the title of the PDF I posted earlier. Every one of the above use variations on claims of future tense action, not past tense.  But, of course, that’s to be expected from the DNC leaks (BUT RUSSIA INVENTED THOSE TOO IT’S ALL RUSSIA BETTER BOMB THEM!) which prove the media’s owned by the DNC or vice versa.
    What does any of this spittle even mean?  Variations on claims of future tense action?  Just search for the freaking title.

    edited August 2016 pbrstreetgstourque
  • Reply 57 of 65
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,064member
    crowley said:
    And nary a leftist-owned shithole in sight
    Just like I said, illiterate:
    Learn how to read the English language.
    Learn how to read the English language.
    I assumed you made a typo, since why would you add all those conditionals to remove sites like the Guardian if you wanted to see "leftist owned shitholes". 

    You do realise that a "-theguardian" conditional will mean results from The Guardian won't show up, right?  Your list of conditionals is excluding those "leftist owned shitholes" so it's no wonder they weren't showing up.  Why are you even trying to find the "leftist owned shitholes" that you hate so much, and why would you expect them to show up in a search for a fairly obscure USA-Russia treaty?

    You either don't know how to search, or... well, I can't think of an "or" since you're making no sense.  As usual.  
    edited August 2016 pbrstreetgstourque
  • Reply 58 of 65
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Learn how to read the English language.
    gtr
  • Reply 59 of 65
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,064member
    Learn how to read the English language.
    Learn how to write coherent sentences, sweetheart.

    maybe that'll help you perform simple tasks like searching the Internet.
    edited August 2016 pbrstreetgstourque
  • Reply 60 of 65
    mytdavemytdave Posts: 438member
    Go away. You've lost all credibility.
    tallest skil
Sign In or Register to comment.