Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obama Administration Argues For Backdoors In Personal Electronics

Posted by samzenpus on from the let-us-in dept.

mi writes Attorney General Eric Holder called it is "worrisome" that tech companies are providing default encryption on consumer electronics, adding that locking authorities out of being able to access the contents of devices puts children at risk. “It is fully possible to permit law enforcement to do its job while still adequately protecting personal privacy,” Holder said at a conference on child sexual abuse, according to a text of his prepared remarks. “When a child is in danger, law enforcement needs to be able to take every legally available step to quickly find and protect the child and to stop those that abuse children. It is worrisome to see companies thwarting our ability to do so.”

17 of 575 comments (clear)

  1. Update to Godwin's law? by spiritplumber · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any sort of securista ploy to invade private property like this that starts with "think of the children" should be automatically subject to Reductio ad Hitlerum.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    1. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by Scottingham · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seconded. Maybe Mrs. Lovejoy's law? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    2. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I don't understand is the lack of concern about security.

      I'm far more afraid of a terrorist/criminal organization getting access to these back doors, and reading all of the encrypted documents that companies (including government contractors) want to secure, than hidden communication allowing them to get away.

      How is the government not concerned about corporate espionage, terrorism, and other criminal activity, you'd think from a security standpoint, they would want encryption to be legit.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even so, a backdoor on full disk encryption, though I suppose requiring physical access, is a security hole. I don't see how that's not a higher threat to national security than the devices that can't be cracked, unless a weak password was used.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    4. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They sow these seeds because there is a vast acreage of fertile ground.

      The US is in a complete state of nervous prostration. Home of the brave, my arse!

      There's nothing wrong with being a little cautious or careful or nervous. Nature rewards aggression. If you can't see it coming, you're toast.

      The problem, though, is that the US government now sees its own citizens as the threat.

      It's one thing to defend the US from outside dangers. It's quite another to regard the citizens themselves as the danger.

      That's what's changed recently.

    5. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by Gription · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm wondering if there is an official guideline that the administration has to spin anything into a child safety issue. "Just follow this simple flow chart before releasing to the press."

      The whole "safety, safety, safety" bit has gotten so ridiculous and I am endlessly surprised by the fact that a majority of people haven't cried "bullshit" on it. We are in the safest time in history. The thing that has changed is that a single instance of some wack job doing something crazy is blasted out of every media channel and people believe that it is a credible threat. (That explains lottery ticket sales.)

      Reality check: When you have 300,000,000+ people in a country every single day there are going to be a multi digit number of them that do something so horrendous as to drop your jaw. That doesn't make it a credible threat. Hell, if you were actually on a US domestic flight on Sept 11th 2001 you would have only have a 1 in 10,000 chance of being on a doomed flight. We aren't at a credible level of risk beyond your chance of slipping in the shower or down the stairs.

      The government IS NOT a responsible agency to be given the master keys to your life (or even a valet key!). If you had a teenage child with the same level of fiscal responsibility and the same way of dancing around the truth, you would ground them for life.
      Yeah, I will take a .00000001% increase in risk in exchange for .1% increase in safety from being screwed with by a government agency.

    6. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Informative

      "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    7. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by magarity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      unreasonable

      Right here is the cop out word that allows a government official to suggest backdoors in all consumer electronics. Given enough time one can grind the populace into agreeing that pretty much any search has become reasonable in light of terrorists/children/terrorist children.

    8. Re:Update to Godwin's law? by SourceFrog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The biggest irony is that nobody seems to care about actual dangers that actually harm children - for example, one of the top causes of teen death is suicide, and a major contributing cause is bullying - there is neither an outcry, nor political effort to even try come up with solutions - we cry "ZOMG think of the children oh noes, ban encryption and implement government surveillance" while simultaneously daily shuttling our depressed victimized alienated kids into the very school system that will inflict so much abuse on them that they commit suicide, without thinking anything of it, just telling them to "ignore" what is inflicted on them.

      --
      My other UID is three digits.
  2. Save the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The excused used by dictators since the dawn of time to rob you of your liberty.

  3. Where can I find the except clause? by ChrisKnight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    No matter how many times I read that, I can't seem to find the clause that says "Except when..."

    --
    -- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
    1. Re:Where can I find the except clause? by aaron4801 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter." "Unless it's politically expedient to change the rules, in which case, fuck you."

  4. The obvious retort by MaizeMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Holder, please investigate why is the NSA putting so many children at risk. But conducting extra-legal (and arguably extra-constitutional) collection of data for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with child abductions, they're driving the adoption default encryption across the US and across the world, making data unavaliable to police and emergency responders in critical situations. Won't the good folks at the NSA please think of the children?

  5. Re:Clipper Chip Anyone? by itzly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And those who understand history are doomed to watch others repeat it.

  6. what is this obsession with children? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As if any crime becomes less serious if it is commited against an adult. Using the biological urge to protect the young of the species to achieve your goals is just despicable.

  7. Is it "worriesome"? Really? by JudgeFurious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's worrisome that my government thinks it should have the ability to get into every single aspect of my life with minimal obstruction because "someone", "somewhere", is doing something they shouldn't be. I am thinking of the children. I'm thinking that unless people stand up to this kind of shit "the children" are going to grow up in a world where they have absolutely no privacy and think it's perfectly acceptable for that to be the case.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  8. This is why we can't have nice things by necro81 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the government hadn't been stomping all over its authority (and limits thereof), then perhaps such measures wouldn't be needed.

    Holder contends that "It is fully possible to permit law enforcement to do its job while still adequately protecting personal privacy.” that may be possible in theory, but governments everywhere have demonstrated repeatedly that they can't be trusted to protect personal privacy. In other words: allowing law enforcement the ability to search through a phone's contents willy nilly, trusting them not to abuse that authority, is a nice-to-have. And because of their actions, we can't have nice things.