Slashdot Mirror
Verizon "End-to-End" Encrypted Calling Includes Law Enforcement Backdoor
An anonymous reader sends this quote from TechDirt:
As a string of whistle blowers like former AT&T employee Mark Klein have made clear abundantly clear, the line purportedly separating intelligence operations from the nation's incumbent phone companies was all-but obliterated long ago. As such, it's relatively amusing to see Verizon announce this week that the company is offering up a new encrypted wireless voice service named Voice Cypher. Voice Cypher, Verizon states, offers "end-to-end" encryption for voice calls on iOS, Android, or BlackBerry devices equipped with a special app made by Cellcrypt.
Verizon says it's initially pitching the $45 per phone service to government agencies and corporations, but would ultimately love to offer it to consumers as a line item on your bill. Of course by "end-to-end encryption," Verizon means that the new $45 per phone service includes an embedded NSA backdoor free of charge. Apparently, in Verizon-land, "end-to-end encryption" means something entirely different than it does in the real world.
Verizon says it's initially pitching the $45 per phone service to government agencies and corporations, but would ultimately love to offer it to consumers as a line item on your bill. Of course by "end-to-end encryption," Verizon means that the new $45 per phone service includes an embedded NSA backdoor free of charge. Apparently, in Verizon-land, "end-to-end encryption" means something entirely different than it does in the real world.
...on which 'end' they're backdooring you in apparently.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
People are running around with computers in their hands, the phone is now nothing but an add-on feature, as such we should be able to have a real p2p encrypted channel with communications over it, so for people with data plans this shouldn't be a problem. I am more interested seeing if we can have a system that uses voice to send encrypted data over it...
You can't handle the truth.
Aren't our calls supposed to be encrypted anyway? I mean, so some jack ass with a radio can't listen to them? So what are they charging me for here?
Sounds like a reasonable product for the government.
For the consumer though, you have to ask yourself what you're actually getting with this? Doesn't appear to be anything. After all, the only people that could normally break into your communications would be the government anyway.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
as we have pre-selected the best of the bad guys to listen in on all your calls! this handy feature is worth twice the price!
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
See the CALEA Act passed in 1994. Telecom providers HAVE to provide that backdoor. If not - they are subject to fines of up to $10,000 per day per connection not in compliance, and having their network shut down until it comes into compliance.
Your indignation should not be directed at Verizon - it should be directed at Washington, DC.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Verizon sells you end-to-end encryption and then sells NSA the key.
Yeah, so they clandestinely compromised your software and network transceivers and near silently passed legislation to make it all retroactively legal tacked onto other bills instead. That'll teach you to stick up for your rights you worthless proletariat.
Like that bit about Congress deciding parallel construction due to NSA cellphone taps does not violate your 1st, 4th or 5th amendment rights. We all know damn well that those assholes were NOT representing their constituents when they voted on that one. If that passes SCOTUS, basically all is lost and everything just gets worse until it affects rich folks enough that they get pissed off, arm a bunch of people and organize.
Make no mistake, the current regime (government and large corporate) views you as the enemy. An inconvenience in their way. And the more inconvenient you are, the less they care about breaking any and all laws to see you silenced or discredited. Welcome to Hell folks, it only gets worse from here.
If you think you're defending against the NSA with encryption provided by a big telecom company, you're fooling yourself, even if this policy weren't public. If, on the other hand, you're defending against basic hackers hired by a competitor, then perhaps this would be a reasonable option. It's like locking your doors, putting bars on all your windows, and putting your stuff in a safe. Sure, that'll keep most burglars out, but do you think the NSA wouldn't be able to get to your stuff?
This is the part that bugs me: "so long as they're able to prove that there's a legitimate law enforcement reason for doing so." It used to be that meant demonstrating to an impartial judge that they had probable cause, which takes the form of a warrant. However, it doesn't say they need a warrant...so now it's a Verizon employee rather than an impartial judge who gets to decide if there's probable cause.
Why wouldn't you just install Signal?
It's free, open-source, and the team is headed by someone respected in the security industry. (Moxie)
Better yet, with TextSecure integration into Signal -- coming soon to IOS (beta) already available for Android as standalone app -- one's text messages are also protected.
It's simple: you can't. They won, let's face it. There's nothing anyone can do.
Unless they make the same mistake the Nazis did and start persecuting the rich, no one will have the funds or manpower to organize an effective resistance. And due to very effective media manipulation techniques, anyone else who tried to rise would be labelled a lone, kiddie murdering, child molesting, atheist, serial rapist that preys on cute rich white girls.... and boys. And the cops will obviously be in fear for their lives as they shoot you in handcuffs.
They aren't making the same mistake the Nazis did. This is not race warfare. This is not religious warfare. This is CLASS warfare. And you aren't part of their class but they will never truly admit this to you directly. They'll just have you pulled over for your car being too old, shoot your dog in the backseat, and tell you to stop resisting as they cave your face in with onlookers doing nothing because you dared look them in the eye. And the perpetrators of the violence will investigate and clear themselves. Welcome to 21st century America.
...US Laws.
'nuff said.
No, seriously, can we please stop being shocked and appalled over the (ancient) concept that a US Corporation would beholden a US Citizen with any form of communications service that also contains a back door for the US Government? The OMGWTFEFF attitude is wearing thin.
US Corporation. US Laws. CALEA is twenty years old now. You have no Right to privacy anymore with any US-based communications service.
Oh, and according to this Administration, you just might be a terrorist if you think or assume otherwise. Have fun.
The Supreme Court says they are null and void, iow not law.
Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and other founders also expressed this principle.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.â (Marbury vs.Madison, 1803.)
âoeEvery law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.â (Thomas Jefferson, Elliot, p. 4:187-88.)
âoeâ¦the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding. In the same manner the states have certain independent power, in which their laws are supreme.â (Alexander Hamilton, Elliot, 2:362.)
âoeThis Constitution, as to the powers therein granted, is constantly to be the supreme law of the land.⦠It is not the supreme law in the exercise of a power not granted.â (William Davie, Pennsylvania, p. 277.)
âoeIt will not, I presume, have escaped observation that it expressly confines the supremacy to laws made pursuant to the Constitutionâ (Alexander Hamilton, concerning the supremacy clause The Federalist Papers, #33.)
âoeThere is no position which depends on clearer principles than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.â (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, #78.)
Any backdoor is by definition available to everyone. Some may have a key, the others have lockpicks.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.