Slashdot Mirror
Top Democratic Senator Will Seek Legislation To "Pierce" Through Encryption (dailydot.com)
Patrick O'Neill writes: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) will seek legislation requiring the ability to "pierce" through encryption to allow American law enforcement to read protected communications with a court order. She told the Senate Judiciary committee on Wednesday that she would seek a bill that would give police armed with a warrant based on probable cause the ability to read encrypted data. "I have concern about a PlayStation that my grandchildren might use," she said, "and a predator getting on the other end, and talking to them, and it's all encrypted. I think there really is reason to have the ability, with a court order, to be able to get into that."
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
Perhaps the good Senator should reflect upon what King Canute actually intended to say when he made his demonstration about his inability to stop the tide.
Mathematical algorithms, like so many parts of our physical universe, don't give a flying fuck about Congress. It's like trying to pass legislation to make Pi equal to 3.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
A.K.A. "will somebody please add backdoors that will eventually get abused by the government and then used by thieves and hackers to do even worst shit."
Because it will rapidly become de rigeur for companies that are serious to use encryption that can't be broken on that basis. US companies can be part of that - or watch as their meal ticket evaporates...
2345 A3DF 5782
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
"I have concern about a PlayStation that my grandchildren might use," she said, "and a predator getting on the other end, and talking to them, and it's all encrypted. I think there really is reason to have the ability, with a court order, to be able to get into that."
You could be involved with your kids and *you* be in charge of who they are communicating with via your playstation
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Some republicans are too, but I wonder if there is an area of life that politicians, especially Democrats - don't want to control?
And then everyone will react by sending their encrypted (first level) traffic through a tunnel that performs a second encryption level in a country that laughs at their legal requests. She just doesn't get it. Encryption is here to stay for very good reasons law enforcement has to adapt.
I'm sure she means well (I mean, at least she's talking about needing a court-order, which is a Constitutionally compliant practice) . But yeah, pretty bad.
Still nothing like a "series of tubes" though.
...that this stuff sometimes isn't even stored anywhere.
So a conversation takes place between one or more people of suspect. Police want to know. Let's even pretend that they make a solid case to a judge and get a warrant. They serve Sony the warrant to find out what was said, and... ...they are told that there is nothing to give them. Voice conversations aren't generally saved from these video game systems.
"I have concern about a PlayStation that my grandchildren might use," she said, "and a predator getting on the other end, and talking to them, and it's all encrypted. I think there really is reason to have the ability, with a court order, to be able to get into that."
If you are so worried about a predator talking to your grandchildren through the Playstation network, why are they using it unsupervised?
Take care of your own problems, don't make the government do it for you.
Take this sig and smoke it.
She is all for spying...except if it is on her...
*facepalm*
</thread>
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
If you have access to the conversation on the children's side, you have ALREADY pierced encryption. The endpoints aren't hidden by encryption in most cases, that's a function of NAT/VPN/tor/etc
The Indiana Legistlature has already tried to legislate on mathematics.
The bad guys are just going to keep using existing software that doesn't have these backdoors (esp open source software that can be vetted). In other words, this legislation will accomplish absolutely nothing but making mainstream communication tools less secure.
So, i assume both sides would vote on the same. Does this also represent what the voters want? Or does this represent a narrow band of the ruling elite.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
That's funny did Dianne Feinstein just imply that she can't trust her own children to raise their children properly?
Pi = 3
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein, born Dianne Emiel Goldman[1] (/ËfaÉnstaÉn/; born June 22, 1933), is the senior United States Senator from California. A member of the Democratic Party, she has served in the Senate since 1992.
Served on the Senate since 1992.
82 years old with no fucking clue what she's talking about.
I have a concern about the IM apps my grandchildren might use and a predator getting in the middle and spoofing messages from their parents. A predator could pierce through encryption and send messages like "mommy won't be able to pick you up from school, but uncle bob will, so do whatever he says."
...I expect Slashdot to thoroughly Savage Diane for her attempts to undermine internet freedom and privacy just as they savaged Trump for merely suggesting what Hillary Suggested.
Let's also seek legislation to allow officers to get warrants that allow them to read the minds of potential criminals so they know when they are lying. Because "I think there really is reason to have the ability"
The only thing she wants the government to pierce is the back hole that gets opened when they say grab your ankles...while they say it is good for you and for your own protection.
From TFA:
What did LE do before the internet?? There are all kinds of things that are/were said and done in this world, Mr. FBI, that you did not, will not, and often should not know. Why is that difficult for you to understand? Guy eats breakfast in a diner every morning; two weeks later he kills people. You don't know what was said in that diner, either. Should all diners be required to record all conversations that take place in their establishment, and forward them to the FBI?
Wait, don't answer that, you probably think they should.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
all you really have to do is either con the key out of your target or BEAT IT OUT
Only reason why Feinstein keeps getting re-elected (not because Calif is a blue state full of liberals, Dianne pissed off her liberal base) is because any R candidate is more of a nut job. Nominate someone moderate and you'll for surely have a Republican Senator for California.
I wonder why the other issue about encryption has not been raised....drum roll please....
Encrypted information takes up more storage space, and actually can cripple most storage systems because it does not "de-duplicate" . I just finished a project where we "unencrypted" a 20+ TB database because the new storage system we purchased couldn't just store the data as is.
I love how there is a fundamental misunderstanding of how encryption works. The whole Playstation argument is fucking stupid too. Microsoft/Sony will work with law enforcement to trace paedophiles who use their gaming networks (even though most abusers don't use any technology. They abuse people they know; usually close friends or family members. But that's a whole-nother issue).
This goes back to SOPA, PIPPA and any other law about the Internet. Congressmen and Senators are typically students of law. They have little to no understanding of how technology works, yet they feel as if they can legislate it.
If a law was passed requiring encryption backdoors, then you would literally be in the situation where only criminals could actually reliably use encryption. It's kinda hilarious when you think about it.
Can this get any more formulaic?
Is there a handbook on legislative tactics that specifically says, "If you can't get what you want any other way, emphatically shout THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!11eleventy!1!"
Or is this tactic really that effective, so people continue to use it over and over?
Why doesn't Feinstein also add to her bill a clause giving the cops the power to fly and invulnerability? That is just as possible as legislating that cops will have the ability to break encryption.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Math is hard.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Don't get all caught up and just focus on her stupid statements. Focus on the real issue: A never ending struggle to screw you and me. And our kids. Forever and ever.
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
she deserved no less. she's an embarrassment to the state of California and the United States. (No, I did not vote for her or her "friend" Boxer.)
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
She OK with them talking to predators if it is not encrypted?!?
child abuse!
Don't give your cause a bad name by misrepresenting the 4th amendment. It asserts the right of people to be secure in their stuff against _unreasonable_ searches and seizures, and say that warrants are permissible with probable cause.
Whatever reasonable objections you have, this isn't one of them. The 4th doesn't protect anyone's stuff when the government has probable cause to search that particular stuff, including communications.
Diane "Buttlicker" Feinstein. You had it right all along, Jello.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
The path towards a police state justified by terrorism and the always reliable pedophilia.
What surprises me most about this miserable waste of skin is that she's from supposed progressive California.
...is an enemy of freedom. How she keeps getting re-elected, I'll never understand. She ought to be tried for sedition, and hanged after being convicted by a jury of her peers.
It's really concerning that we're seeing this trend all over the world. Even though most of these dinosaur-age politicians barely have a clue about encryption and technology in general they are now in a position to cause a lot of harm. Some of it may be unwittingly, perhaps the NSA folks are saying that they can't stop the terrorists without this.
Consider that so many businesses and people have centralized their information into "the cloud" and more are moving everyday. Centralizing puts us all in a much weaker position since the cloud providers (Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Rackspace, etc.) will have to follow these potential laws.
In contrast, before this cloud centralization millions of servers would have to be updated all over the country and at a minimum it would take much longer to implement something like this. People and companies would also have more options and control over their data.
In any case, it's disappointing to me that this is happening in the United States. It reminds me of why my father risked his life fleeing from the communist country I was born in.
Lastly, it's not going to matter anyway. The criminals will still break the law and probably move to even more encrypted/secured services.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
This bill would require a court order before the encryption can be "pierced".
Well, if you have a court order, you don't need to pierce the encryption - if the suspect fails to give you access to the messages in question, you can lock him up for failure to comply with a court order! And you can keep him there indefinitely until he complies! THE GRANDKIDS ARE SAFE!!
#DeleteChrome
... force you to decrypt any encrypted document with a court order. In fact, the law is so broad that if you go into court and the judge says "please give these nice officers the encryption keys for your hard drive" and you say "no", they can say "OK, I'll just put you in jail for contempt of court, without bail, until you do." Which can literally be forever. There are no limits that I know of for jail time for contempt of court for an ongoing refusal to comply with a court order. So it can literally be life not even in prison, in JAIL, until you do.
If th issue is terrorism, the powers are even broader and can involve you being sent to a concentration ca -- I mean "federal jail on a remote island" until you cough up a lot more than just the keys.
What they want is the power to read dynamical communication streams in real-time, because decrypting them is often too difficult even for the NSA and because a lot of them are encrypted with one-time or digitally saved keys so that a user CAN'T just cough them up. If my ssh private keys went away, do you think I have them memorized? NOBODY could decrypt my old network traffic, not even me!
Now we just have to wait a bit for the legislative branch to realize that a) we lack the theorems needed to make their nifty idea work; and b) any end user can trivially work around it by simply exchanging keys for one of the known secure algorithms; c) it isn't necessary for any saved, recorded data; and d) it isn't constitutional. It's exactly like trying to pass legislature that would require all house keys to be "registered" and constructed in such a way that a master key in the possession of the police would open them. Good luck with that one.
Besides, they already can. The key is called a "brute force", and if they use it, yeah, they have to go up against the effort the householder put in to stopping brute force entry. If their "house" is a repurposed bomb shelter with six foot thick concrete walls, good luck to them.
rgb
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
Why are politicians allowed to make any rules over something they clearly don't even understand the basics about?
This woman should and would have been laughed out the hall if any of the others listening to her even had the first clue either.
Exactly ... fund the creation of some super computers to brute force encrypted systems in a reasonable amount of time should a court approve an order.
The next thing you know, they'll require that all safe manufacturers create a master key that unlocks everything they make.
If they seize a safe, they can drill into it ... it's not pretty, but it's not something that someone might be sloppy with and post on the open internet for anyone to copy.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
It's not necessary that encrypted traffic be "pierceable". It's that the Govt will mandate that all traffic go through 3rd party (man in the middle) clearing houses. These companies will store the data encrypted and only decrypt it when issued a court order. So any point to point encrypted traffic will likely be illegal; and if possible blocked from occurring. Yuk..
All the worlds indeed a
If it's a criminal act to encrypt, then only the criminals have encryption. That's good, because at least when they're selling all your stolen data and credit card info, THEIR transactions will be secure.
82 years old with no fucking clue what she's talking about.
I don't buy the ignorance gag for a minute. Politicians can hear both sides of every argument, and generally do. They are all well educated, and have well educated staff around them all the time. When it's convenient for them to look dumb, they play their role and look dumb. And the asinine measure that people pushed back against becomes an incremental step toward their agenda, and in extreme cases Black Projects that the citizens don't know about for decades.
For nearly half a century I have seen people believe the idiot gag and remain amazed at how far down the shitter we have gone in so little time. Meanwhile, a few people said what I just did.. and they have predicted correctly.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Politically something WILL be done, they have racheted up the FUD levels to the point the public wants more security theater.
I still say the best course is to assuage the fear by making the Internet a little less global along the lines of Trumps proposal to shut certain parts of it down. The alternative is you are going to have this kinda a crap forced on you. A broken by design system where everything is monitored by the thought police and you had better be running some defined back doored per-approved protocol or someone will be sent over to kick in your actual front door.
Politically this is where its headed right now. I would rather just say the Internet is going to be US - EU - China + [ others that conditionally want to participate ] from now on and still have a somewhat free and flexible network.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
So, is she proposing that the authorities have the tool / keys to do this, but must pinky swear not to use it without permission?
If they were in earnest about the need for a warrant / oversight, then they should have no reservation about agreeing for it to actually be impossible for the authorities to "pierce" communication without being first granted specific, targeted keys to do so. This would be a one-time expiring key pairing between the communications provider and the Court, which is handed to the authorities.
I suspect they would decline this solution, because it isn't a carte blanche opportunity to monitor at their own discretion.
...really don't matter any more. They don't feel the need to understand the things they're legislating for and what the likely consequences will be, e.g. weakening encryption in the USA will make banks, power stations, public records, congress' computers, etc. more vulnerable to cyber attacks. They're simply relaying their paymasters' wishes, mostly verbatim. Some of the documents they use even have embedded metadata from the corporate think tanks and lobby groups that originally wrote them. They should at least learn about document metadata to avoid such embarrassment, otherwise we can replace them with any old popular idiot, you know, like has-been Hollywood B-movie actors ;)
....That lawmakers have the pass a test after receiving rudimentary education on anything they might make a law on.
This lawmaker completely fails maths. Its almost as bad as if congress proposed a bill to repeal the laws of thermodynamics
How is being able to read encrypted data, with a court order, going to prevent anything? Are they going to get a court order to read it real time? How would they know who to snoop on? The gov had no idea this latest spontaneous act of terrorism was going to happen and could not have prevented it. All that stuff they have gotten to show what terrifying terrorists these nut cases were was gotten after the act. I'm also going to call that information "plain text" as I didn't hear how they got keys to decrypt it. I'm just not following how the gov can read minds with this new power to circumvent encryption and save anyone. You can't predict random. Sorry you just can't. Oh they may get lucky once in awhile but it was just a guess on the gov's part mostly and not enough to justify handing the keys to millions of peoples private information over. F. U. D. We want more power over your little lives. That is all it is.
And her next bill will be to put a microphone and camera in every house, I'm sure.
1) At some point in the past, I've handed you a password
2) I math a secret, resulting in gibberish
3) You math my gibberish with your password, resulting in my secret.
At exactly what fucking point does anyone expect the gov't to be able to do anything? No one was involved except the two communicating parties!
If you're particularly stupid or fascist, you can claim that the carriers could prevent it, but then you're saying every single bit that passes through their lines must be 100% decrypted and understood to make sure no "unpierceable" encrypted bits get through. And that's ignoring the obvious problem of steganography.
Idiots.
Last post!
More interesting is the First Amendment right to speak, encrypted, as encrypted speech is itself speech.
I like fighting this on the grounds of the pocketbook, it harming US companies bound by it, and the eventual and inevitable failure of government to keep escrow keys secret. Fight it there before gets back to the Supreme Court.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
People will not be allowed to whisper things or pass notes to each other or send private letters ... or say/write anything without a government "listener" present to monitor the exchange. (And, of course, another listener when that information is subsequently recorded, etc...)
And... that about solves it.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Father Coughlin is the chaplain of the SJWs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
So, if the US is one of the main innovators in encryption, if this is done, why would anyone trust encryption software made in the US? Doing this cripples US security, firewall, and any other encryption vendors, and creates new opportunities offshore for companies who won't compromise security, and can make strong encryption.
Less secure means that security conscious users will try to circumvent the restrictions, too.
I'll bet most parents don't know what their kids are sending and receiving right now in all our devices. Kids either get proper training early on from parents or not.
Even if you "force" the bad guys to get new computing devices (LOL), the brainless legislator doesn't realize that there are images which look normal and are viewable by anyone to have embedded proprietary information that only the sender and recipient know of and whether secret messages exist or not. There is NO ENCRYPTION for viewing the image itself.
Bad guys are always going to be able to create ways to pass secret messages.
"The barbecue is set for September 22. Tell Ahmed to bring the burgers and Moe the chips."
Sir, it's some kind of code. Call up AT&T and find out what "burgers" stands for and what "chips" stand for. You'll need a warrant. Judge LeRoy is a dependable rubber stamp.
FineSwine is more accurately described as a bottom-feeding scumbag.
The great tragedy of Harvey Milk's assassination is that FineSwine was able to milk it to get a senate nomination.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Yeah, the Gestapo said Joe is probably an enemy of the State, so they got Judge Fido to issue a warrant. Go over every site he has ever visited with a fine tooth comb.
I admit corruption trumps process. But STUPIDITY is what makes this bill an abortion.
Please submit all your sensitive conversations, including sensitive political conversations, to the Department of Privacy. The Department will guarantee your privacy unless subsequently directed otherwise by statute, or court of competent jurisdiction, or lawful executive order. Please be advised that the Government will not be liable for any unauthorized discharge of escrowed private information.
Legislation like this puts us on the road to dictatorship. Perhaps Ms. Feinstein should join up with Mr. Trump.
Aside from this, it's just not possible. A few agreed upon phrases in plain text (e.g. "The chocolates are ready to be opened on the plane) and no encryption is necessary at all.
Blaming encryption is just more flailing about by willfully ignorant political hacks who are unwilling or unable to actually think through a real world problem.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Another Senator to add to the list of "Traitors to the American people" list
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
- C.S. Lewis
"Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) will seek legislation requiring the ability to "pierce" through encryption to allow American law enforcement to read protected communications with a court order." [emphasis mine]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHA.
How 'bout we pass some legislation that things that should only happen with a court order, only happen with a court order?!?!?
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
If she's worried about her grandchildren talking to child molesters on their PlayStation, perhaps she should talk to their parents about keeping an eye on what Junior is doing in his bedroom without supervision - you know, where encryption doesn't matter because they can just read the damn screen - instead of creating a backdoor that the child molesters can use to spy on Little Johnny and plan their kidnapping out of his bedroom because they know that the parents don't pay any attention to him while he's jerking off to porn on his PlayStation.
Or maybe "think of the children" is, as usual, a load of shit excuse to invade people's privacy, and expand the power of government.
I am going to be generous to Senator Feinstein, and assume that she has no technical/IT knowledge, so is reliant on staffers and advice from lobbyists about what the benefits and consequences of something like this would be. I could be wrong, and it could be that she is fully aware of the consequences, but a short-term benefit for the surveillance state and a long-term open door for cyber-crime does not seem like a politically shrewd move.
However, that in itself presents a problem - if we assume that this one politician has no first-hand working knowledge of the consequences of what she is proposing, then we would also have to assume that many other members of Congress and the Senate, plus many other political and legislation bodies around the world, similarly have little or no understanding of (a) the way computers and the Internet work, and (b) the consequences of weakening encryption in this way. If those assumptions are true, how can those individuals (or even those institutions, if the level of ignorance is at enough of a critical mass to hamper an intelligent debate on the subject) be trusted or expected to craft effective, meaningful and beneficial legislation on the topic?
Answer, they cannot. Hence the reason we have expert advisors and so on... who also need to be both independent and also be SEEN to be independent.
Ahh crap, we're screwed.
If they get the warrant, you can still refuse to "decrypt" as you can plead the 5th in that the encrypted records "could" incriminate you.
I imagine that would be about as successful as refusing to give up a DNA sample under court order.
how is this person qualified to be a senator and try to implement laws when she brought up her own children to allow their kids (her grandchildren) unsupervised chats on online chat rooms while playing violent games where people are murdered.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
FTFA: "A spokesman for Feinstein's office told the Daily Dot in an email that the senator has been working with Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) the issue of encryption and that Burr's office is taking the lead on potential legislation."
Richard Burr is not in the "Democrat Party", whatever that is. S/h/it is not in the "Democratic Party" either. S/h/it is a tea-partying Republican.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
Someone point out to her that she's as crazy as Trump on this one?
She's always been a proponent of terrible ideas like this, though.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I've only been ashamed to be a Californian twice in my life, when Prop 8 (2008) passed, and this.......
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have a right and a responsibility to check what my children are doing or to help them if they forget their passwords. If the software notifies them when I take a look and what at, a master key is more respectful of their privacy than sharing the same password.
So why doesn't she address her specific problem of "I have concern about a PlayStation that my grandchildren might use" rather than trying to create a backdoor for NSA under the guise of protecting children?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
..and why overall it's a Bad Idea anyway. Please, call or write the good Senator and also explain why having a 'backdoor' in any encryption system will render it essentially useless.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
For being a jew she sure is a fucking nazi.
Of course it will help! It will help sabotage political opposition, destroy Free Speech, and do all sorts of other things that benefit the established elite. That's why all those goddamn authoritarian fuckwads love the idea so much!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Y'know, VPN + TOR = about 90% of the fight won already. I suppose APK can even make a more than valid case for hostfiles in this connection. Hate to give that poor fellow the nod, as he still needs professional help; but (deity help me) I'm actually considering running his software. I may have to get over the author being crazed, or find another similar solution written by someone still in possession of all their marbles.
She's the longest serving senator there. I'm assuming she's taking her cues from Obama and Hillary essentially saying they think encryption is the devil, albeit veiled, only coming out with a harder stance they can't take as easily as she can.
So, a tool for the party, which is itself one of the two fronts for the military industrial complex/corporate oligarchy. I guess senators can self-radicalize too then?
"Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) will seek legislation requiring the ability to "pierce" through encryption..."
Someone should tell Sen. Feinstein that it's mathematics, not a hymen.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Encryption is like a locked room with two doors. The first door is well armed and protected. The second door is also well armed and protected, but the key is available to ALL commers. All one needs is a court order to get the second key, and presto it's open, and also now available to anybody, reason - Snowdon. --- All right one says we will do away with the second door, but require key escrow. Same problem - all one needs is a court order to get the second key, and presto it's open, and also now available to anybody, reason - Snowdon. --- So what is the solution, live with good encryption, but insist that everyone divulge the key "on presentation of a court order" with some heinous penalty for not releasing it. That way the encryption is not compromised, but still readable "with a court order" not like it is now ANYBODY can read it.
and in fact anyone over the age of 10 or so is already trivially ignoring and bypassing their copyright laws. I expect their encryption laws will also fall quickly to the pre-teen set should they so desire.
Fact is those grandkids are way fucking smarter than grandma will ever be.
When the US gov/mil wants to "Pierce" into US hardware and software with junk and tame default encryption, the consumer can buy other strong brands and services.
The global consumer has the right to route around the US mandated trapdoors, backdoors, gov/private sector partnerships and useless encryption, weak standards, extra gov keys and constant logging.
The more backdoors and trapdoors a nation mandates, the less competitive their software and hardware exports become.
Soon it will become more smart to write code in house and only each out to US standards when and where absolutely necessary with the least about of data exposure.
People globally know any gov keys, codes, access does not stay with any one gov or mil department. Telco staff, private brands, contractors, mercenaries soon get a copy out to other nations or anyone who can pay.
Dual citizens, the need for cash, political or cult or faith based ideals soon allow lot of other nations or random wealthy groups have the same once "secret" US gov backdoors, trapdoors or access.
The keys to junk national encryption standards get shared very quickly and globally over the productive use of any product, network or service.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
If they want the legal ability, that suggests they already have the technical ability but retain themselves to use it for legal reasons.
In other words, all encryption is already broken. That, or either she is pushing a law without understanding what she says.
The levels of crazy that woman is capable of never cease to amaze me. She's like a female, Democrat version of Trump, only difference is the good people of California have seen fit keep electing her into various government offices since the 70s.
Heh... I clicked your link which led me to find this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I'm sure there's some science to be had in that video but that's not even remotely important.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Once a month, every month forever, to go and remind them that trying to get rid of or weaken encryption through legislation is
1) Impossible to enforce
2) Guaranteed to give more power to criminals than to law enforcement (as it always has) - because any backdoor can be entered by bad guys as well as good guys and bad guys don't usually bother with getting a warrant first
3) An absolutely unconscionably severe assault on freedom of speech
4) Stifling to research that is critical to the national security of the united states.
5) Pretty much mathematically impossible to achieve
Hopefully each congressman may notice *one* of these reasons, all of them true.
I mean, I have no hope it would actually work... but at least when it blows up in their faces (again) we would be able to say "I told you so".
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
So they didn't encrypt anything, and all the spying being done on EVERYONE didn't help or provide any clues that the attacks were going to happen. So lets pass a law on encryption, because then we would have known? How the fuck does anyone even think that's a logical fucking argument.
There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
...while you're at it so the American law enforcement could effortlessly hover over suspect with the court order.
You'd think she'd learn from her own recent history how such measures can be abused.
http://www.nationaljournal.com...
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
It can attempt to modify behavior of people but that is it. Reality stands above the law and people that seem to think different (like Feinstein) are delusional.
The reality of the matter is that you can have secure crypto or backdoored crypto. The latter is insecure and can be attacked by any number of attackers. There is _no_ way around that. (For details, look up the discussion the crypto experts have had on this in the last few years.)
Backdoored crypto is hence a gross risk and far, far worse than not being able to read every message desired.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Republican Party in California is broken. Feinstein's reelection was so assured that they didn't bother to nominate a real candidate to run against her. And Boxer's most recent opponent was that horrible person, Carly Fiorina. The real problem is binary partisanship, a natural outcome of the winner-takes-all voting system. When both parties agree on all the structural issues, the American voters have no real choice.
Have a nice time.
How to pronounce the big words, but doesn't know what they mean.
Saw the headline, and I just knew it would be Feinstein. One of the worst of the "regulation for regulation's sake"/"think of the children!!!" bunch.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Isn't she a member of the house intelligence committee and a strong supporter of the Patriot Act? We need to protect the children? Right! If you're concerned who your children are talking to install a key logger, restrict their access, keep computers and gaming consoles they use in the front room, and watch their activity. I'm sure this is an attempt to add back door to encryption and it will be expanded to not just protect children just like all other federal regulations. With a warrant, law enforcement could probably install spyware on the suspects computer to capture information before it is encrypted or determine the password they are using to encrypt their communications. Back doors only weaken encryption and it is bad enough that companies don't encrypt information and it ends up stolen by hackers or foreign governments. With a back door, these same hackers will be able to steal information even if it is encrypted. In addition, law enforcement will abuse such a back door key. To illustrate how a back door breaks encryption, look at those "TSA approved" locks that are easy to unlock and are useless since not only can the TSA open them, others have found out how to open them too. In my case I was able to use another key to open a "TSA approved" lock by just jiggling the key until it opened the lock. I didn't realize I was using the wrong key and wondered why I initially had troubles opening locks. People have created master keys with 3-D printers to open any TSA approved lock. Will this happen to all encryption? Most likely it will.
She told the Senate Judiciary committee on Wednesday that she would seek a bill that would give police armed with a warrant based on probable cause the ability to read encrypted data.
Yuk. Should be "She told the Senate Judiciary committee on Wednesday that she would seek a bill that would give police, armed with a warrant based on probable cause, the ability to read encrypted data." Note the commas.
So the police will have to seek a warrant, while everyone else just skips that requirement and goes straight to the "encrypted" data? I just want to see their bank account transactions secured with the likes of rot13, it would make my day, it really would. Can I have that for my holiday present, please?
--Udo.