Slashdot Mirror
Harvard: No, Crypto Isn't Making the FBI Go Dark
Trailrunner7 writes: The FBI and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have warned for years that the increased use of encryption by consumers is making surveillance and lawful interception much more difficult, impeding investigations. But a new study by a group of experts at Harvard's Berkman Center says those claims are largely overblown and that the IoT revolution will give agencies plenty of new chances for clear-channel surveillance.
"We argue that communications in the future will neither be eclipsed into darkness nor illuminated without shadow. Market forces and commercial interests will likely limit the circumstances in which companies will offer encryption that obscures user data from the companies themselves, and the trajectory of technological development points to a future abundant in unencrypted data, some of which can fill gaps left by the very communication channels law enforcement fears will 'go dark' and beyond reach," the Berkman Center report says.
"We argue that communications in the future will neither be eclipsed into darkness nor illuminated without shadow. Market forces and commercial interests will likely limit the circumstances in which companies will offer encryption that obscures user data from the companies themselves, and the trajectory of technological development points to a future abundant in unencrypted data, some of which can fill gaps left by the very communication channels law enforcement fears will 'go dark' and beyond reach," the Berkman Center report says.
You'd think that all that Ivy League brainpower would be able to figure out that the FBI's empty posturing is exactly that. Of course, it's also very possible that its kabuki all the way down.
Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
He never envisioned that, instead of a totalitarian government imposing viewscreens on everyone and then pounding the populace into submission, one could just offer "reality programming" on the viewscreens. The populace pounds itself into submission, and all a government has to do is plug into the APIs that everyone has voluntarily installed in every room of every house. And if there wasn't a totalitarian government already in existence, well, preinstalled omnipresence and omniscience certainly makes a fertile field in which one can sprout.
He doesn't think?
He neither thinks for everyone nor speaks for everyone. The mass of people tend to believe the US government is spying to protect them so they don't care.
They forget that the fastest way to lose civil liberties is by failing to stand up for the rights of the worst people in society--thieves, murderers, investment bankers, terrorists.
You don't just protect the rights of minorities because of egalitarian or meritocratic principles. You do it because so long as you can slice society up into little segments and take the rights away from one group, everyone's rights are at risk.