Slashdot Mirror
California Bill Would Require Phone Crypto Backdoors
Trailrunner7 writes with this except from On The Wire: A week after a New York legislator introduced a bill that would require smartphone vendors to be able to decrypt users' phones on demand from law enforcement, a California bill with the same intent has been introduced in that state's assembly. On Wednesday, California Assemblyman Jim Cooper submitted a bill that has remarkably similar language to the New York measure and would require that device manufacturers and operating system vendors such as Apple, Samsung, and Google be able to decrypt users' devices. The law would apply to phones sold in California beginning Jan. 1, 2017.
Of course, "smartphone vendors" wouldn't be able to decrypt voice calls sent using VoIP software that was encrypted outside their domain of influence.
I wonder how much the N$A paid the New York stooge and this guy for their support of this anti-crypto bill?
During initial set up, flip on encryption... there you go, you can have that one for free Apple...
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Wouldn't be the first time you couldn't buy something in CA.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Don't see a (R) after a politician's name? Must be a Democrat. Want to see if I'm right?
DING! Winner winner chicken dinner.
Not that both big parties aren't corrupt as hell, but this is such a petty affectation...
Film at 11 Next the law of gravity will be repealed. Then for good measure we will print money out of thin air... oh wait, we do that already.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
California Bill,
Die!
Yours,
Yosemite Sam
This is really bad, but it's going to get rammed through in California, which will make it de facto law everywhere... just great.
Fuck you, California. Go fall into the ocean already.
Next, they will criminalize possession of a phone or other device containing any encrypted data that cannot be decrypted on demand, without assistance from the possessor.
(When strong and safe encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have strong and safe encryption.)
Guess there really is a first time for everything. The democrats want to ban selling math and I won't stand for it.
Encryption is known to the State of California to cause cancer.
If the topic of a post is about a proposed legislative bill, is it really so difficult for a news organization (or even a lowly Slashdot submitter) to provide a link to said bill so that there might be at least a small chance of informed (hahahahaha) discourse over the particulars?
No, I'm not new here.
Go!
The new phones must come equipped with the California admissions package.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
for the decryption keys to get stolen. Saying, "I told you so, you fucking retard," never gets old.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
If this theoretically passed and you buy a cellphone from another state or country but use it on a plan in California, and the phone doesn't support decryption, would that work?
I can't find the bill text. Is Feinstein a co sponsor, I bet so.
Didn't we win this battle in 1991?
Land of the free? Home of the brave? How's that working out for you?
Oh, wait, is it brave to cower in the corner jumping at shadows in case the bogeyman comes along? I've lost track?
Now cue a bunch of people telling us how they're still free. Go ahead, I love a good laugh.
Papers please, comrade. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Leave it to an ex-cop to seek powers for law enforcement at the cost of individuals. I am disappoint. Not the least bit surprised, but disappoint. If this passes, I would be completely in favor of both Apple and Google saying "screw you guys, we're picking a new home".
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
the smells like the RSA crap from yesteryear..
China would be so proud!
I sincerely hope Apple spends enough money and exerts enough lobbying influence to kill this bill. They're based on California and it seems like they're a primary target of this legislation. The "orwell" tag applied to this story really isn't appropriate. This isn't necessarily about big brother spying on people. It's an awful idea even if warrants are required for police to demand messages and data be decrypted. Once messages and data can be decrypted by law enforcement, criminals will also be able to decrypt them. That means credit card numbers and passwords stored on phones will be vulnerable. Private business communications, documents, and data will be vulnerable. It puts people and businesses at great risk of fraud and espionage. And this won't just affect New York and California. Smartphone manufacturers won't produce separate systems for states that require encryption backdoors and those that don't. We'll all be vulnerable in the US. Yet those of us who don't live in California and New York don't really have a say when dipshit state legislators who don't understood technology propose fucking stupid laws like this.
And please don't push the big brother angle on this. It's not about spying. It's about security and criminals exploiting law enforcement backdoors. Tim Cook gets it and has made statements about how this makes everyone vulnerable to crime. I'm hoping Apple goes all in to defeat this measure in California.
Only four of our governors the past 100 years have not been one of those Republicans. They rule never every moment of our lives.
None of it matters when you have no idea what the SIM card is doing or the GSM radio. Both run operating systems we have no clues about the capabilities of.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I'm hoping that one day there won't even be a California.
Still praying for that massive earthquake!!
I'm not in this guy's district so his stupid web page won't accept my comments, could someone who is in his district please call or email and explain to this guy why what he wants to do will just make law-abiding citizens less secure, not aid law enforcement in any substantial way, and in the end only help criminals and terrorists? Thanks.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
This just catches the low level criminals and normal people. Mafia, KGB & Israeli Mossad will just use older iPhones and other methods.
Math is known to the state of California to cause cancer.
Captcha: Corrupt (for real - you can't make this $hit up!!)
Yeah.... but if even *one* Californian makes it to the Nevada shore... the cycle will start all over again...
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Recently chaptered SB 178 adds some pretty stringent requirements on who can get access to electronic communications and how.
It's now incorporated into law as California Penal Code 1546
Lawmakers pass a bill declaring pi = 3, saving the world many thousands of hours of tedious calculation. Hooray!
With the OS having root over any keystrokes before "encryption apps" and a company having designer links in CA.
Re: "ecrypted and unlocked by its manufacturer or operating system vendor" would be covered by laws like the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)...
As for devices been super secure, recall the years of news about "Cops Say They Can Access Encrypted Emails (January 11, 2016 )
https://motherboard.vice.com/r...
Note the access news going back a few years...
Also recall the issue of why any backdoors are really bad for any nations telco system:
SISMI-Telecom scandal, an illegal domestic surveillance program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and the
Greek wiretapping case 2004–05 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–05
Weaken any encryption and any staff, ex mil, ex staff, ex contractor, former telco or gov staff, other nations staff, anyone with skills or the cash can get the same deep access...
Also note the news from Australia about who gets that no court needed "law enforcement" role long term locally.
61 agencies apply for metadata access (18/01/2016)
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/...
"... a comprehensive list of agencies which had applied to receive accreditation as enforcement agencies under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, which will give them access to make metadata requests."
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Such software would be outlawed, clearly.... it won't stop people who expressly want it from getting it, but it creates a barrier for entry such that most law-abiding and not very technologically competent people will simply not want to be bothered with the inconvenience of bypassing it.
Of course, in the end, the only people that they will be able to spy on are the people who haven't cared enough about their privacy to worry about it and are probably not doing something that the feds are trying to catch anyways, which means that it will do absolute diddly at helping law enforcement.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
> I'd personally like to see Apple very publicly give the finger to the CA legislature and make it extremely clear in very blunt terms that iPhones not being for sale there is the direct and exclusive result of the residents of the state electing retards and shills to make their laws. Losing CA for a year or two won't hurt them much, and will pay off big in the long run for future sales in CA as the voters stomp to the polls to vote with their iphones.
You say a year or two, I'm thinking it would take a week or two for Californians to get awfully pissed as they're told "sorry, it's illegal in California to sell you a smartphone. The only people who can change that are your state reps; here are there phone numbers."
Yeah.... but if even *one* Californian makes it to the Nevada shore... the cycle will start all over again...
Typical /.-er. More likely it will take one male Californian and one *female* Californian...
Since obeying the law is the price of doing business, Apple Corp. and friends will comply. But there are 3 possibilities here.
1) Apple Corp and friends increase the sale price by 30% to a) compensate the company for the cost of making/holding a model which is back-doored and the key can't be changed via firmware; since that would lock the police out of the phone, b) to use the state-created duopoly for increased profit. I say duopoly because smaller manufacturers will have to choose between compliance for California (and New York) or the rest of the USA.
2) Apple Corp and friends allow the handsets to be firmware-flashed, possibly after selling everyone the back-doored model: Walled gardens like Apple Corp will have to provide the back-door-deleted update. California cannot legally decide what updates are released to the rest of the country (inter-state commerce is federal), meaning there will always be an out of state alternative. Since the responsibility of "smartphone vendors" will probably be limited to the OEM outlets/manufacturers, resellers like Verizon and Sprint can do the update as part of their branding before shipping the handsets to California.
3) The key databases of Apple Corp and friends are cracked; after all, the data isn't valuable to the "smartphone vendors" (So why waste money protecting it?) and the law doesn't specify what level of security is required. The crackers then publish the key for every phone owned by a politician.
The issue politicians forget is when you add back doors to devices you are also adding a back door for criminals and other foreign entities. The reality is government departments are rubbish at securing information for an extended period and once the information is out every criminal and foreign government now has a free pass to all your citizens private information. Also just saying there is a back door alerts criminals and they will start looking for that back door.
Californians reproduce by asexual budding.
ISIS has just release a new Android encryption App:
http://www.defenseone.com/tech...
There is no prohibition in this law against using encryption applications. ISIS will help you get around California's encryption laws.
Unless both a mathematician and sociologist working together can show in a hard proof that crypto with a backdoor is as secure as crypto alone I maintain that crypto with a back door is not crypto so the request is impossible to fulfil and simply moot.
Like the lawmakers that tried to make PI = 22/7 the request is simply a violation of reality, proving once again the politicians have no concept of reality.
But fails to penetrate a device used by organized crime, terrorists, a technologically adept pedophile, or a well connected businessman.
Is Joe the Plumber the threat here? because that's about all this regulation will stop.
PS - I usually buy my smartphones on aliexpress and import them to California.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
* This message has been brought to you by the Nevada Chamber of Commerce.
The State of California is known to the state of California to cause cancer. This is known to the other states as Californication.
My aunt's niece’s brother in law's daughter died form a terrible case of encryption, complicated by her WiFi allergies, you insensitive clod!
So do you trust your government or your carrier more?
Can't do it in Fed law, so they're doing it in State laws, piece by piece. Maybe with Federal incentive dollars.
Nah, "Californian" is a dominant trait. Like brown hair and brown eyes.
Someone told me Jim Cooper is a Nazi, is this true?
Would they be elected/appointed if they say that they will propose such bills before elections? Full of lies. But hey, hopefully a lot of people will just buy phones (unlocked!) from overseas and pay no CA sales tax which is outrageous in itself.
I miss the cold war.
Back in the good old days the "free west", would tout it's political and social freedom as why it was on the side of humanity.
Something for the oppressed behind the iron curtain to dream of attaining and seeing their over lords for the tyrants they were.
Then down came the Berlin Wall.
Today you'd think the history books on the communist era in east Europe were the manuals/manifestos for state control in the West.
The only thing our governments needs to be better than today is IS.
Jesse Jackson probably put him to it. If Silicon Valley won't hire enough "our people" then we'll pass laws crippling their business!
Use software written in Russia, a VPN service in China and a ISP in the US, by the time they untangle the bureaucratic red tape to decrypt your packets, you'll be safely dead from old age!
Min
On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
Never had a need for a gun, anyway so no loss there.
... stating they will not be selling iPhones in CA any more. See what happens then.
I have been worried that using encryption will attract attention of law enforcement who will know I something to hide. What a tremendous relief that I will now look just like another law abiding citizen using escrow crypto. While at the same time, I will use this escrow crypto for 99% of my communications, including my embarrassing but legal porn collection. And then, just when I hatch my evil plots, I will encrypt a small amount of data with my own crypto, before stamping escrowed one on top.
Now the government has no reason to suspect me unless they get a warrant, sift through ALL my stuff and manage to realize that a second of noise in a 2 hour movie file contains my real secrets.
I for one welcome our new technologically illiterate overlords!
This will have about as much chance of sticking as the "non-California vehicle emissions fees" they used to charge people for bringing in cars from outside California (i.e. want a phone with strong encryption? Take a trip and buy it outside California.).
(1) The car emissions fee was declared unconstitutional (it violated the Interstate Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, just like trying to restrict bringing phones with strong encryption would violate the ICC).
(2) If you bought a phone with strong encryption outside California because California made them illegal, California would have a hell of a time trying to charge a "use tax" on the thing, since it would be (effectively) a sales tax on an illegal product. Ask the State of Utah how successful its Marijuana Tax Stamp Program was in combatting either marijuana, or the purchase of marijuana without paying the cigarette tax on it.
Both of the bills -- the New York one and the California one -- are pretty much sponsored by grandstanding morons who apparently feel they are not getting enough press, so they have to try and get something in front of the news organizations in the hopes that it will be picked up on the next slow news day.
I eagerly await the day that SF/LA hippies are told they can't buy the new iPhone.
Next .. only government approved apps can be installed on new phones...
I'm not American but does that mean with a warrant or your equivalent of a court order? Can pc plod just say he wants it?
> Pretty soon you won't be able to buy anything in California.
You'll be able to buy them little stickers that say something is known to cause cancer to the state of california.
A week after a New York legislator introduced a bill that would require smartphone vendors to be able to decrypt users’ phones on demand from law enforcement, a California bill with the same intent has been introduced in that state’s assembly.
I notice that there is nothing mentioned in the article about requiring a warrant, only that devices must be able to be decrypted "on demand" from law enforcement. Use of a warrant is implied, but is never actually mentioned.
“Ninety-nine percent of the public will never have their phone searched with a court order.
This because 99% or law enforcement are criminal thugs who think a badge and a gun is all the warrant they need. Even with the Supreme Court decision against random searches of phones without a warrant, it still continues and local DAs laugh at you when you complain.
if I was making cellphones, that's what I'd do. cut 'em off like Murderistan. the people would rise up and throw those asshats out of office in two days. probably throw them off a cliff into the sea. pity, some poor shark would die of a tummyache.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Oh there will never be a shortage of overpriced real estate. You can always buy some of that :)
Having each state set it's own standards as to the functionality of phones is unworkable. Potentially Apple would have to meet 50 plus standards just in the US. Is the California market is large is it large enough to justify a separate system? The state would have to also control the telephone companies otherwise you could just go mail order or internet and buy a non crackable phone. To make it work you would have to make it so there would be no inter state or international sale of smart phones. The federal government can control interstate commerce. And I doubt China would help restrict the sale of smart phones to the US. The sate would have to make possession of uncrackable smart phones a criminal offence. Apple or will sell many uncrackable smart phones before 2017. If phones that are owned by California residents are uncrackable does California confiscate these phones? Does California have to pay for the phones that would are confiscated? Almost certainly. The states seem to be trying to force federal action. But in the end stupid is as stupid does.
Worst case scenario they will sell the backdoored smartphone in CA and you will just need to take an easy trip to Nevada to pick up your undecryptable smartphone
Which, when placed on any product, is probably true -- most of the stickers probably have such chemicals in their ink or paper/plastic.
...will band together and ban the sale of cell phones in their states which meet the requirements of these bills. Then vendors would have to decide to abandon one or the other market OR keep two SKUs for every device. In states that didn't have any law at all about the subject, consumers would learn to demand the phone with the "Freedom SKU" rather than the "Big Brother SKU". Used phones with the Freedom SKU would have higher resale values so consumers would be willing to pay a bit more for them.
Okay, it won't happen -- but it's fun to consider.
No, folks like you somehow feel the need to try to get rid of the rights of others. In the end you only help criminals and psychopaths by creating victims with your gun free zones. If we would let you continue your idiotic path, you would enforce insurance on home defense. People wouldn't be able to afford it, and you would add numerous victims of one-sided armed burglary encounters to your already blood-soaked policy history.
Liberals Demorats in California do this, and it's not big deal to their liberal base. They don't say shit. Good thing this wasn't Texas... the liberals would be screaming to burn the state down.
Just because you make something Law doesn't make it Lawful. Many new laws get overturned by the courts, particularly when they bump up against constitutional freedoms.
How many more data-points do you need before you realize the goal is to completely control your ability to fight back against the machine?
Encrypted, portable, real-time communications enable you to form a network of like-minded individuals and coordinate their actions. Firearms are a force multiplier for such a network. That's dangerous to a position of power which skims the fruit of other people's labor. Likewise, it's not dangerous to honest people inside or outside government...
totalitarianism is paved with promises of safety and righteousness.
Private bill would require ponies for all.
Requiem for the American Dream
The Democrats of the post-Kennedy era have achieved many of the "successes" which they could not achieve legitimately via congressional legislation by one of the following two methods:
1. Put together a sympathetic, and often false, legal case and file a lawsuit in a sympathetic court with Democrat-appointed judges (see: "9th circuit", "Rov v. Wade" etc)
2. Go to a big Democrat-run state, like California, and ram through a product mandate/regulation that will cause manufacturers to make ALL their products comply nationwide because they want to sell into the big market with the new rules and it's generally cheaper to have one product for the entire nation than a special version for California only. This has been done on a far-wider scale than most people realize and only failed to work on auto emissions where the CA rules were so expensive that most car makers did indeed find it worthwhile to make a special California model.
And, no, I am not some pro-Republican troll..... the GOP has its own forms of nasty manipulations, mostly aimed at deceiving their own voters while selling-out to corporate cronies (something that's causing them a little overdue grief in this election cycle).
These two tactics however are related to the posted story. This (using the power of the control a party has in one state to force industry to make a nation-wide change) and the court-based tactic I mentioned (our founders did not enable the courts to create laws, and wrote that they intended our courts to be the weakest and least-active branch of government) is NOT how the country is supposed to work. Ideally, the people in Tennessee (random example) should not be affected by the madness of the people of California, and the people of California should not be affected by the legislative proclivities of Michigan (another random example). The states are supposed to be individual "laboratories of democracy" where various policy ideas are tried different states and best ideas spread (and the damage from the worst ideas getting thus limited, and states needing special treatment for special situations get what's needed). Historically, this dynamism enhanced the overall progress of the nation. This continual sidestepping of the intents of the founders of the nation is destructive to individual freedom an liberty.
To deliver ponies to the special people in spite of third-party VoIP software, additional coercion would be required.
Requiem for the American Dream
Californians reproduce by asexual budding.
wouldn't that be "dude"ing
California Bill, Indiana Jones and Dakota Johnson, You 'murkins are a funny lot.
-- Make America hate again!
We can't have the Jews' cattle (goyim) talking to each other in private! They might be saying something 'anti-semitic'! Oy vey...
They reproduce by karyokinesis, like all bacteria.
He has the advantage, for the sake of celebrity but nothing else, that he can say anything that he likes because he will never be in a position to implement any of his ideas. His own party will not let him.
It's stating problems to be popular but never offering solutions that will be carried out - an old political trick.
It's easy to make sense when you say something is wrong and it genuinely is a problem. But that's not a solution. All he's done lately is make a lot of noise, get attention and delay bills for a few hours without actually stopping them.
I'm disappointed.
I thought those California girls were supposed to be DD.
I think, the poster might be referring to some recent Qualcom chipset, where the modem is part of the northbridge.
Thus some core critical part of the chipset run a firmware that is *NOT in anyway modifiable or accessible by the end-user* (for legal reason).
Instead that part of the firmware is controlled by the service provider who pushes automatic update over the air (to both the SIM card it self and to the modem).
Due to its critical position in the chipset, that firmware can also have access to some critical parts like video buffer, RAM, GPS, etc.
That's often the case with Qualcomm chipsets.
Replicant has a wiki explaining the difference between good and bad platforms.
My personal experience: my WebOS powered HP Pre3. Runs on such a Qualcomm chipset. OTA update to the modem firmware will cause THE WHOLE PHONE TO HANG AND CRASH.
As mentioned by the wiki, there are also phone that use a Qualcomm chipset without a modem (for tablet) and then eventually (for phone) plug an *external modem* into it as it should.
My personal experience:
- my Sailfish powered Jolla Phone. According to specs, it runs on a Qualcomm chipset that doesn't have a built-in modem. When my ISP sends an update, the *separate modem* part reboots gracefully, the rest of the phone barely notice it (i just get a pop-up asking me to re-enter my PIN).
- similar behaviour used to be with my older webOS Palm Pr : used an OMAP chipset (those don't have any modem inside) and a separate modem chip. Phone didn't crash on modem-firmware problem (but, back then, OS wasn't that good at rebooting the modem. Some time turning 3G on/off could do the trick, sometimes I would need to ask the whole phone to reboot. SIM card can be changed live, but won't necessarily work without a reboot).
To make a metaphor:
Classic style smartphone chipset :
(like the Ti OMAPs, the Qualcomm without modems, etc. : modem is a separate chip.)
It's like your laptop. You have a laptop, you're in charge of your laptop, you connect whatever you want on it. You can install the OS you want on it.
Like on your laptop, if you want to have connection, you plug a separate thing into it like a USB 3G/4G modem.
This modem only takes care of the connection.
If anything goes wrong you can simply unplug and replug the USB modem.
(Well as the modem in a smartphone isn't a physically separate circuitry, but only a separate chip, you don't actually take it out physically. It requires a bit additionnal circuitry. But the basic image stands: the modem doesn't and can't affect the rest of the system).
Qualcomm style smartphone chipset :
(i.e.: with the modem built right into the northbridge of the smartphone chipset):
It's like your fiber/DSL/cable modem. It has USB ports where you can plug additionnal storage. It has analog ports where you can plug phone handsets.
BUT it's a device that is basically lent to you by the ISP. The ISP is in charge of remotely upgrading the firmware that runs it.
The equivalent of "getting Linux to run on it", is plugin an USB keyboard and USB screen on it, and trying to do something with it (or using a raspbery Pi, while using the modem as a NAS to access everything that stays plugged into its USB ports).
You have access to an interface with you keyboard and screen, the it's still the modem which is in charge of everything, not only the connection, but also all the storage you pluged into the USB port.
If the ISP wanted (or received a government letter ordering them to), they could access your storage and siphon your data: because it's plugged into the modem's USB port and they are the one in charge of the system running here.
That the case with some recent Qualcomm-based smartphone, where the modem is in charge of controlling the RAM, the mass-storage, the GPS, etc.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It's not the physical SIM-card itself.
See my other answer in this thread.
And see the Replicant wiki.
On some chipsets by Qualcomm (which are extremely popular) the *modem part* serves as a northbridge to the chipset.
It handles some critical component like RAM, sound hardware, and OS is running on a CPU core that is a client to that.
And for legal reason, the entity responsible for the code running both on the physical SIM card it self and running in the modem firmware is the service provider.
Regard TFA, that means that even if Google decide to say "Screw you!" to NY and CA legislation, the phone service provider is just one governemnt letter/order away from getting all your data.
(because, remember: all your data is on a flash medium that is directly plugged into the modem running the service provider's firmware. Your Android is running on a CPU core that is a client to this modem).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It's not the CPU core and memory that is inside the physical SIM.
As I have explained in my other answer in this thread, it's the modem part.
The modem - which for legal reasons runs a 3rd party closed source firmware provided by your service provider - of several Qualcomm chipset works as "sort of northbridge" to the chipset.
The modem (and its 3rd party firmware) is in charge of several critical parts of the phone, which may include RAM, audio hardware, GPS, etc.
Android runs on a CPU core that function as a client to this modem an accesses everything thourgh it.
Replicant have complained about this in the past and documented in their wiki.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
The poster isn't exactly *wrong*.
He just have poorly understood and reinterpreted in own words, an actual problem that does exists for real:
Some qualcom chipset have the modem inside the main SoC and that modem works as a "sort of northbridge" for the SoC.
The modem is in charge of handling RAM, audio hardware, GPS, etc.
That modem, for legal reason - runs a 3rd party firmware that is provided by the phone service provider.
Android runs on a CPU core that is client to this modem to access the phone resources.
See my other answer in this thread.
And see the Replicant wiki.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
We need a kill morons day like Simpsons snake day.
Nice to know YOUR needs are so important they trump the needs of the rest of the country. you must be a very important person.
I say, no one NEEDS a slashdot number over 1122992, so you really should delete your account now. in fact, I don't think you really NEED to have internet access. Let's just get that turned off for you.
The law of unintended conquences could cause a problem. Here is how it may play out.
All smart phone manufactures are pushing for better consumber protection. This can result in a small list of approved phones for sale in California such as the special California approved emissions vehicles at a higher cost.
The backdoors are known to California. Californians buy phones on trips out of state and online. Due to the portability of phone numbers and cell phones can call all of the US as local calls, the phones have out of state area codes to avoid enforcement by law enforcement. First ones to have out of state phones are Law Enforcement, Lawyers, Social Services, Government Employees, Bankers, and Drug trafficers,
Due to the low number of cell phones sold specifically for California, manufactures stop making them.
Consumer demand finally sunsets the law as it is not effective and not usefull to law enforcement as the only phones remaining in California area codes are of no interest to Law enforcement as anyone of interest has out of state phones.
Once these backdoors are put in place - hack the hell out of them. Make consumers nervous that their data can be stolen.
Then let's see what the politicians want to do.
Of course - only the data on the phone must be decrypted. If I use, say, Google docs - that data is "in the cloud." does that count?
How much do you wanna bet that they are trolling for donations from the tech industry to get this abortion of a law canceled?
Nobody really needs food, you can grow enough worms in a barrel to meet your nutritional needs.
I want my speration of pwoers and warrents back. 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. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects
Guns have approximately no effect on your ability to fight back against the machine. They may stop a crime or get you killed or something like that, but against the authorities they're irrelevant except in the very short run.
People with small arms can't stand against the Army. They can make nuisances of themselves, if enough of the local population supports them, but that's about it.
Good crypto is much more effective. Secret, reliable, easy communications are great to coordinate things.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Clearly you haven't heard about Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, or even the thirteen British colonies that were located on the continent of North America. Professional armies can and have been defeated by freedom fighters (also called terrorists, insurgents, etc by the powers that be depending on the circumstances) that only have small arms.
If you're scared just say you're scared.
geologists disagree. *always* has a limited lifetime. invest in Arizona beach front property now.
Clearly, you haven't paid much attention to Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. They did not succeed in defeating invaders. They did succeed in making their lives complicated, and did a good job in operating where the modern armies weren't at the time. Particularly in an urbanized country, resistance does need to involve winning battles.
As far as the Revolutionary War goes, the militia were able to win some clashes, but to do any good they had to be able to win battles at least somewhere, which was what Washington's army was able to do after getting trained by von Steuben. They also had access to modern military weaponry.
Guns aren't going to defend against the government.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Jim Cooper, the Californian, represents a district that includes Elk Grove, site of a big Apple facility, as well as various other parts of the south-of-Sacramento area. His political connections are much more with the Sacramento-area cops than with the Apple employees he represents, unfortunately, and also he's unfortunately a Democrat, so unless he gets a primary challenger, he's going to win re-election. But he's only a first-term Assembly member, so there's still a chance to knock him out.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks