Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Clinton Hints At Tech Industry Compromise Over Encryption (huffingtonpost.co.uk)

Posted by Soulskill on from the backpedaling-scheduled-for-this-afternoon dept.

An anonymous reader writes: At the Democratic presidential debate last night, Marques Brownlee asked the candidates a pointed question about whether the government should require tech companies to implement backdoors in their encryption, and how we should balance privacy with security. The responses were not ideal for those who recognize the problems with backdoors. Martin O'Malley said the government should have to get a warrant, but skirted the rest of the issue. Bernie Sanders said government must "have Silicon Valley help us" to discover information transmitted across the internet by ISIS and other terrorist organizations. He thinks we can do that without violating privacy, but didn't say how. But the most interesting comment came from Hillary Clinton. After mentioning that Obama Administration officials had "started the conversation" with tech companies on the encryption issue, one of the moderators noted that the government "got nowhere" with its requests. Clinton replied, "That is not what I've heard. Let me leave it at that." The implications of that small comment are troubling.

9 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. No Backdoorts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There should be zero back doors, ever. The government has ways to get information. In any event, want access to a mobile phone would likely be after the fact. And, if the government suspects someone, they have ways of listening in without compromising everyone. This kind of thing should be targeted. For suspected terrorists, a chair and a rubber hose works well.

    1. Re:No Backdoorts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a post-Snowden world, only the naive would believe anything other than:

      1) Backdoors exist.
      2) Backdoors are kept secret.
      3) The government routinely uses backdoors for big-data style tracking (and to gain superior market insight for insider trading).
      4) The only data that remains secret is data over which you have superior end-to-end control.

      The government will never accept a backdoor-free industry. Never.

    2. Re:No Backdoorts by kheldan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The government will never accept a backdoor-free industry. Never.

      Then ironically enough they will be the authors of their own destruction -- and all of us along with them!

      Organizations like Daesh (I refuse to call them a 'State' because that's a bad joke), while complete assholes and utter animals, have proven that they have some tech savvy people in their ranks; what makes the U.S. Government think for a even a second that they won't have their own backdoor-less encryption? Of course the obvious answer here is that this isn't at all about stopping 'terrorists', it's about having complete and utter authoritarian, nigh-unto dictatorial control over the U.S. citizenry. I don't want to believe it but what else are we to believe? These idiotic politicians we elect must have tech advisors, they must be screaming in their ears that 'backdoors' in encrytion renders it as useless as using duct-tape to secure the front door of your house against burglars, and I'm supposed to believe that they're just shining these advisors on as 'alarmist' or something? LOL, no, it's corruption plain and simple I'm afraid. The Tree of Liberty has been rotting from the inside out for many many decades now, and we're seeing the end-stages of the disease that is killing Liberty and Justice in this country. At this rate it won't be long before we're considered just as bad if not worse than the Russian Federation, mainland China, or for all I know, Syria under the Assad regime. Meanwhile the Bread and Circuses are used to mollify and distract 99% of the U.S. population, they're clueless, and will look at you with a confused look on their faces, and fearful that you're just some crazed person -- then they go post on Facebook about it, like good little robots.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  2. The biggest problem with backdoors by jdavidb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The biggest problem with backdoors is not that they weaken encryption, although that's terrible. The biggest problem is that even with a warrant government shouldn't even know this stuff. ISIS or Daesh or whatever the heck they called it never endangered me. Never has, never will. But "my" government endangers me every day by getting involved in these situations and by making them worse. And now, conveniently, the fix for their screwups, according to them, is for me to sacrifice my liberty and weaken my technology.

    I'd say "no thanks," but I don't get a choice. So instead I'm like the guy at a traffic stop having my car searched by an officer without probable cause. I won't resist you doing this to me, but I do not consent.

    --
    Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
    1. Re:The biggest problem with backdoors by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The biggest problem with backdoors is not that they weaken encryption, although that's terrible.

      No, that is the damned problem.

      There is NO technical means by which you can have a backdoor which is only usable by one government. Once you build in that kind of defect it stands a good chance of being exploited by anybody else -- other governments, hackers, criminals, and even the very terrorists you claim to be fighting.

      And if the idiots in the US government feel the rest of the world should have weakened crypto for your security ... well, then the US government is an actively hostile entity to our security and liberty.

      The belief that government should have unfettered access to everything we do, and that we should trust them is idiotic. Because it's not just one entity who potentially can gain access.

      What they're saying is they want a skeleton key for every lock, and they're stupidly claiming nobody would ever abuse that and nobody but them could get to it.

      Any product which builds in this for the US government should expect every other government to demand access to the same back door, and should also expect people in every other country to stop buying it.

      This isn't a solution, and it never can be. You want access, you get a warrant, and compel people to give you the password.

      But pretending you can access it but nobody else can indicates you're a moron who doesn't understand the technology. Once you weaken it, you have weakened it for anybody who can figure out how. That's doesn't leave anybody else with any measure of security.

      The US government cannot create this without also understanding they've given a means to everyone else to hack into everything in the US by figuring out the way it works.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  3. You don't get it, do you? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By requiring backdoors, you hurt your economy. Because nobody, not even US companies, and you may not even dream about foreign companies, will host any kind of content willingly in a country where any country on this planet has access to their secrets.

    Yes, I wrote any country. Not just the US. Because one thing is certain: These keys are valuable. Valuable enough that it will be no issue to find someone (read: governments or corporations) willing to pay big sums to get the keys and people weak enough to take the offer.

    There is no such thing as a "US government only" backdoor. Never has been, never will be. Require it and watch your IT industry falter.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Walled Garden by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For those who don't understand why a walled garden is bad, here is one of the reasons.
    If you owned root on your device, you could encrypt it yourself.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. The right way to do it by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The elephant in the room, the thing that no one is talking about, is that there's a right way to do this.

    If you have someone you suspect, you can peek into their system specifically using targetted means. Execute a "sneak and peek" search warrant and install a keylogger, for instance. Bug their house, tap their phone, put a tail on them, and so on.

    All of these measures are effective, but they require warrants and reasonable evidence.

    Also, the danger from terrorists is vanishingly small, compared to a lot of other dangers in daily life. Focusing on the backdoors is simply not warranted from the amount of danger that ISIS presents in this country.

  6. Re:No Backdoors & IF THERE ARE ... by dcollins117 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In an interesting article here former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden claims* to be strongly against backdoors in encryption. It's law enforcement (FBI, DEA, etc) that are pushing for backdoors, not US intelligence (NSA). Hayden's rather chilling rationale is that since the NSA doesn't have to follow any rules, they can do bulk data and metadata collection and largely obviate the need to break encryption.

    * Not that you can believe a thing he says, it's still useful to be clear on whether it's law enforcement or an intelligence agency deceiving you.