Slashdot Mirror


The Future Has a Kill Switch

palegray.net writes "Bruce Schneier brings us his perspective on a future filled with kill switches; from OnStar-equipped automobiles and city buses that can be remotely disabled by police to Microsoft's patent-pending ideas regarding so-called Digital Manners Policies. In Schneier's view, these capabilities aren't exactly high points of our potential future. From the article: 'Once we go down this path — giving one device authority over other devices — the security problems start piling up. Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? What prevents them from abusing that power? Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? Can they override my override?' We recently discussed the Pentagon's interest in kill switches for airplanes. At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?"

13 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. Slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "At what point does centralizing and/or delegating operational authority over so much of our lives become a dangerous practice of its own?"
    Already at day 1, as soon as the slippery slope is hit ... From that point onwards, the battle between the controllers of the kill switches, and everybody who wants to gain control of them starts. Of course the normal user is left back in the middle.

    1. Re:Slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      A well-known security expert (some say it was Bruce Schneier) once gave a public lecture on kill switches.
      He described how the kill switch is triggered by the authorities, and how the kill switch, in turn, is a component in a vast collection of kill switches called our formerly free culture.
      At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The kill switch is really a flat-out plate of poo supported on the back of a tortoise-like electorate."
      The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What are the tortoise standing on?"
      "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
      She then showed the security expert the kill switch controlling his pacemaker, and he turned a whiter shade of pale.


      (a shameless mooching from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down)

    2. Re:Slippery slope by wkk2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Beyond the security risk, the kill feature will be abused. The first time there is a big snowstorm some official will declare the roads are closed and order the kill switch. If you need to go to the hospital call an ambulance. Oh, sorry we stopped them too. Oh, your jury summons was lost in the mail. Issue a warrant and disable all of your cars. Your taxes are over due or your child support is late and you can't get to work. The abuse will be endless.

  2. kill switches for airplanes by Swampash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Awesome, now terrorists won't need to hijack airplanes. All they have to do is hijack the means of controlling the killswitches.

  3. Re:What About the Benefits?? by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Funny

    So then, your two reasons for thinking this is a good thing pretty much boil down to "fear of terrorism" and "people are stupid and need to be protected from themselves".

    Wow. You got me there!

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  4. Fine, as long as I don't OWN anything by gelfling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This has the effect of turning us all into renters. Which is fine, I don't want the title, I don't want to carry insurance, I don't want to maintain the vehicle and so on. As long as I don't have the rights of ownership, I don't want to pay for ownership. And when it's time to get rid of said asset just bring it back to the dealer and let them deal with it. I am fine with being treated like a criminal under those conditions.

  5. You know... by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 5, Funny

    sometimes, I wish my wife had a kill switch. Nag, nag, nag.

  6. Oh, wonderful! by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about a kill switch to prevent a First Post? Of course, the problem is how to get posts starting from second if there's no first. Always unanticipated problems when one tries to implement those security measures some politicians seem to want so much.


    I'd love to see "digital manners" enforcement in theaters, restaurants, buses, etc. If mobile phones are so important that people cannot turn them off, then how did people live thirty years ago? Haven't you seen those old movies, where the detective had to stop at a public phone to send instructions to his associates? Yes, I'd love to see a way to enforce manners in public places.


    However, a kill switch is no answer. If people abuse cell phones by using them in obnoxious ways, how long would it take them to abuse the kill switch? History has shown us, and it should be clear by now, that any sort of digital key is subjected to abuse.


    Even assuming a perfect implementation, that mythical unbreakable code, there's still social engineering. A criminal could buy an old theatre just to get the phone kill switch installed there, if it were necessary for him to silence a phone. And there's always the risk that terrorists could find ways to crack a plane's kill switch in mid-air. When the plane is approaching JFK, wait until it is headed towards Manhattan and then immobilize the pilot's controls.


    Like many medicines of old that have been abandoned because of their side-effects, kill switches are a solution that's much worse than the problem they are trying to solve.

  7. It doesn't just apply to legislation by Chmcginn · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered. -LBJ

    The same sentiment can be applied to new technologies.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  8. Simple questions, simple answers by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Interesting

    • Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? In this order: the Content Cabal, Russian hackers, and federal law enforcement. The Content Cabal gets the authority because they pay Congress and/or the FCC for it, the Russian hackers get that authority because our own security-fu is weak, and law enforcement gets it because terrorists scare the shit out of us.
    • What prevents them from abusing that power? Content Cabal: Nothing (once their power is ensconced in law, it's too late); Russian hackers: Nothing (the teeming masses of neophyte device users will never learn to make themselves secure); and Law Enforcement: Nothing (you can't complain about what you don't know about).
    • Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? I want some of what you're smoking. But seriously, the only guaranteed way to override these limitations is to use devices that are not equipped with such "functionality". (In the case of the Content Cabal and law enforcement, this may eventually not be legally possible.)
    • Can they override my override? As with any form of DRM, it will be a war of escalation between those who want control over their own devices and those who have a vested interest in wresting that control away from you. Any security you manage to get for yourself will eventually become obsolete, either because (a) the device itself reaches obsolescence, through format changes, licensing, insufficient processing power, or plain old wear and tear, or (b) the security measures you obtain are eventually counteracted through countersecurity measures. Neither side will win, of course, which is why the Content Cabal and law enforcement will seek criminal penalties against those who try to maintain control over their own devices.
  9. Did the socialists win the cold war? by paratiritis · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What happened to owning your own property? Why should central authority have the abiity to override everything?

    In any case without legislation making this mandatory the solution is very simple: Use only stuff that is built on open architectures, using only open source SW. Mod anything that limits your freedom.

  10. Re:What About the Benefits?? by dosun88888 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I like how this article bring out all the negatives, but never the positives.

    You have an excellent point here, and I'd like to start listing positives first, and then negatives from now on. Sometimes it's not very clear to me how great things are if looked at in this fairer light.

    Positives:

    1. You lose a little bit of weight.
    2. The voices stop.
    3. You don't have to worry about paying off those credit cards anymore.
    4. It will definitely "show her"

    Negatives:

    1. You're dead.

    Act in question:

    Blowing the back of your head out with a shotgun. ...

    The only negative that needs to be pointed out is that we will completely lose our freedom. But see, people are too dumb to figure out how that happens and give responses like "oh you're overreacting, it'll never come to that!" Then people with a little more foresight start to panic, since they realize that these morons who think the world will be so great with the new kill switches are the majority and will vote this sort of thing in.

    That's when we start with the examples, and when it all falls apart. Giving examples is the worst thing you can ever do when the target is too stupid to understand a concept, since then they forget that they're failing to comprehend a concept, and they instead think that you're trying to barrage them with bullshit. That's when you lose time and again, and in enough time society becomes completely unbearable.

    Then again, there really are people out there that like the TSA because they feel safer with minimum wage employees bossing them around, confiscating their water, and smugly apprehending their deodorant.

    The moral of the story - my argument sucks because it's just a bunch of examples. Feel free to disregard it.

  11. Re:A simple solution by MisterSquirrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except by that time, the infrastructure will be in place, and it will be too late.

    The kill switch devices will have remotely reprogrammable logic, and once in place, they will not merely throw up their hands and give up the first time the system is defeated...they will just harden it until it is very difficult to subvert.

    And subverting it will become a felony, as will disabling the device on your own car, or cell phone, or your camera (so it can't take pictures in "locker rooms and museums"... wtf?).

    This is more than a slippery slope...this is teetering on the abyss of Orwell's wildest nightmare.