Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Government Backs Strong Encryption, Condemns Backdoors
blottsie writes: The Netherlands government issued a strong statement on Monday against weakening encryption for the purposes of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The move comes as governments in the United Kingdom and China act to legally require companies to give them access to wide swaths of encrypted Internet traffic. U.S. lawmakers are also considering introducing similar legislation.
It's nice to see a modern, developed nation that actually believes in freedom.
Dutch legislation is not really relevant, I would say. If most software is coming from the US, including OS from Microsoft, Apple and Google, how are you supposed to enforce adequate encription if the US mandates weaker versions? Is it going to be the GNU/Linux on the Dutch Desktop during 2016?
Most government leaders are EXTREMELY ignorant about technology, but they know technology is important, so they pretend they know things.
If encryption is outlawed, it will just be hidden. There will be large images with messages in the grey areas, for example.
"... how much of the data cloud, or the world's information is in the Netherlands?"
After encryption is outlawed everywhere else, all of it.
We are. For an American or European, there is no problem at all in coming to the Netherlands and living there. What with you being a techie, you'll have a job in twice no time. Nearly the entire population, nowadays, speaks Dutch. Disclaimer: I am of Dutch nationality, although I live in Austria, another EU state (one that does not even make strong encryption a subject of public discussion, but simply and tacitly assumes that strong encryption should be had by all who wish to use it, period).
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
I think you meant to say "Nearly the entire population, nowadays, speaks English"
love is just extroverted narcissism
The USA had a strong crypto export ban in the early 90's. There were no laws against using strong encryption, only about shipping crypto implementations. In practice, it meant that people in Europe had to download Netscape from a site outside the USA.
Their meaning was clear and easily forgiven since their English is vastly superior to my Dutch :D.
Just create a software version of Enigma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma_machine) with eg. 20 wheels. Also, create a matrix which contains how the wheels should turn. You can create thousands of wheel turning patters. Voila, unbreakable encryption without using a sufficiently long one time pad.
Of course, the initial configuration has to be sent somehow (eg. via courier or other conventional ways which 3-letter agencies seem to forget) and the encoding/decoding machine should never be connected to the internet.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
That's for sure. Last time I was in Amsterdam, I met a really nice girl who taught me what backdoors were for. She was just standing in a doorway and was just super friendly. It would have been one of the greatest nights of my life, but I must have lost my wallet somewhere. I remember thinking that she had really strong hands for a girl.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I complained to my MP (in the UK, where our PM has publicly stated he'd like back doors all over the place) and got a response which essentially said "we invest in strong encryption, we don't advocate weakening encryption at all. However, we do want tech companies to give us access to data when we ask for it".
In other words - it's all about double-speak. To turn this into slashdot friendly words: "we come in peace. shoot to kill".
Strong statements are all well and good, but until they also legislate to say (to tech companies) "it's okay to store data in encrypted form that you don't have the keys for", they're not really any different from the other countries of the western world that are keen to snoop on our every move. They're less in-bed with the Americans than we Brits are, so hopefully not quite as pervasive as we are, but apart from scale and efficiency, not that far different.
"... letter is available only in MS Word format and LibreOffice refuses to open it."
.DocX letter opens in Wordpad, with a message saying some of the information may not be viewable. See the text below.
The
"The Dutch government is a bunch of clueless computer illiterate idiots."
Probably Microsoft made another new file format so that new documents cannot be opened by old versions of Microsoft software, or other software. Microsoft is then able to sell everyone new versions. Not everyone can know all the methods of abuse by software makers.
_______________
Aan de Voorzitter van de Tweede Kamer
der Staten-Generaal
Postbus 20018
2500 EA DEN HAAG
Datum 4 januari 2016
Onderwerp Kabinetsstandpunt encryptie
Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie
Turfmarkt 147
2511 DPDen Haag
Postbus 16950
2500 BZDen Haag
www.nctv.nl
Ons kenmerk
708641
Kabinetsstandpunt Encryptie
Hierbij sturen wij u het kabinetsstandpunt toe over encryptie. Hiermee wordt tegemoet gekomen aan de gedane toezeggingen tijdens het AO Telecomraad van 10 juni 2015 (TK 2014-2015, 21501-33, nr. 552) en AO JBZ-Raad van 7 oktober 2015.
Inleiding
Encryptie, ook wel versleuteling, is in toenemende mate eenvoudig te verkrijgen en gebruiken en maakt daarmee steeds vaker onderdeel uit van het reguliere dataverkeer. Door de overheid, bedrijven en burgers wordt encryptie steeds meer toegepast om de vertrouwelijkheid en integriteit van hun communicatie en opgeslagen data te beschermen. Dat is belangrijk voor het vertrouwen van mensen in digitale producten en diensten en voor de Nederlandse economie in het licht van de zich snel ontwikkelende digitale maatschappij. Tegelijkertijd vormt encryptie een belemmering voor het verkrijgen van informatie die noodzakelijk is voor opsporings-, inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten wanneer kwaadwillenden (zoals criminelen en terroristen) hiervan gebruikmaken. De recente aanslagen in Parijs, waarbij mogelijk gebruik is gemaakt van versleuteling van de communicatie door de terroristen, leiden tot de gerechtvaardigde vraag wat er nodig is om opsporings-, inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten goed zicht te bieden en laten houden op aanslagplanning.
De in de vorige alinea beschreven tweeledigheid was eveneens te horen in het publieke debat van de afgelopen maanden over de dilemmaâ(TM)s rondom het gebruik van encryptie. Ook uw Kamer heeft over dit onderwerp gesproken. Tijdens het AO Telecomraad is gevraagd wat het Kabinet gaat doen aan het stimuleren van sterke encryptie. Daarnaast is vanuit de Tweede Kamer gevraagd om te komen met een kabinetsstandpunt rond encryptie.
Hierna wordt ingegaan op het belang van encryptie voor de systeem- en informatiebeveiliging van de overheid en bedrijven, en voor de grondwettelijke bescherming van de persoonlijke levenssfeer en het communicatiegeheim. Daarnaast wordt het belang van opsporing van ernstige misdrijven en bescherming van de nationale veiligheid geschetst. Tot slot wordt na weging van de belangen gekomen tot een conclusie.
De Nederlandse situatie kan hierbij niet los worden gezien van de internationale context. Sterke encryptiesoftware is in toenemende mate wereldwijd beschikbaar of al geïntegreerd in producten of diensten. Gelet op de brede beschikbaarheid en toepassing van geavanceerde encryptietechnieken en het grensoverschrijdende karakter van het dataverkeer is het handelingsperspectief op nationaal niveau beperkt.
Belang van encryptie voor de overheid, bedrijven en burgers
Cryptografie speelt een sleutelrol in de technische beveiliging in het digitale domein. Veel cybersecuritymaatregelen in organisaties leunen sterk op de toepassing van encryptie. De veilige opslag van wachtwoorden, het beschermen van laptops tegen verlies of diefstal en het veilig bewaren van backups zijn moeilijker zonder het gebruik van encryptie. Het afschermen van gegevens die verstuurd worden via
As a dutch native, I can say that the wording was typically weasel wording. Especially the part where the minister, who only a few months ago was openly complaining about encryption, now says in the conclusion part of the official document: > Derhalve is het kabinet van mening dat het op dit moment niet wenselijk is om beperkende wettelijke maatregelen te nemen ten aanzien van de ontwikkeling, de beschikbaarheid en het gebruik van encryptie binnen Nederland. Translation: Therefore, the government believes that it is _currently_ not appropriate to take restrictive legal measures against the development, availability and use of encryption within the Netherlands. The translation was done by Google, and seems to be very adequate, please zoom in on the wording "currently". If that's the conclusion, I wouldn't call it "strong" wording at all, which Slashdot says the minister used. Building in backdoors isn't time related, or currently not a good idea -- it's inherently bad, not just today.
You mean like no longer using warrants to tap a phone?
FYI, lawful intercept is when a police officer puts a tap on a phone after getting a warrant for the phone line and person to be captured.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
In Austria they are so worried about every one's privacy that the use of a dash cam can cost you a fine of around €8,500.
Although the Austrians lifted the ban on Google Street view Google has lost the appetite to enable it. (As in Germany)
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
As an American who lived in the Netherlands for 7 years (first Maastricht and then Amsterdam) I can tell you it's not that easy to find a job. Dutch immigration laws are a pain, and thanks to the PVV and Gert Wilders they're basically trying to prevent more migrants coming and kick the ones already there out. (My source? My visa was revoked and I was politely asked to leave the country after my visa was revoked for being laid off).
What this ends up meaning is if you're EU you'll have no problems (because you can just move there, because it's EU) but if you're non-EU forget about it. (Actually it's just very difficult). And even if you have very hard to find skills you'll be punished for being a foreigner. They'll pay you less (because you pay less taxes) and gouge you for housing prices.
Still, despite the drawbacks it was worth it. If you get a chance, take it.
Have gnu, will travel.
I complained to my MP (in the UK, where our PM has publicly stated he'd like back doors all over the place) and got a response which essentially said "we invest in strong encryption, we don't advocate weakening encryption at all. However, we do want tech companies to give us access to data when we ask for it".
In other words - it's all about double-speak
I'm not sure. Were I running a tech company I would interpret the above as meaning that we should turn over the data. The encrypted data.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.