White House Declines To Support Bill That Would Let Judges Order Tech Companies To Break Encryption (reuters.com)

kheldan quotes a report from Consumerist: Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein are expected to introduce a bill regarding phone encryption as soon as this week, according to Reuters. The draft text will give judges authority to order tech companies to help law enforcement when asked to -- basically, it would be a newer piece of law to fall back on than the All Writs Act of 1789, which is the one that usually sees use for this sort of thing. However, sources tell Reuters that the bill "does not spell out what companies might have to do or the circumstances under which they could be ordered to help," and therefore really doesn't necessarily change the underlying discussions at play, both in the tech world and in government. Nor does the bill specify penalties for failing to comply. The FBI recently briefed Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein on the methods used to unlock the San Bernardino terrorist's iPhone 5c. According to Reuters, the White House is declining to offer public support for draft legislation Burr and Feinstein are currently working on because the administration is "deeply divided on the issue." The White House has reviewed the text and offered feedback, but it is expected to provide minimal public input, if any, sources familiar with the discussions said.

Comments

They are avoiding the right way

[MrKaos]

Burr and Feinstein that is.

The right way is to have an office of the judicature maintain a set of third party keys that law enforcement can request *with a warrant*. That way they can still maintain their operational integrity (i.e the warranted party does not know they are being monitored) and the rest of the populations free speech rights. This could easily be supported by All writs or Telecommunication intercept acts of many commonwealth countries.

The issue is here, that they just want to have access to peoples communications without a warrant, which is a violation of privacy no better than any other garden variety black hat access.

If the police and other agencies can't respect the very laws that they are upholding, then they are breaching the very constitution they are sworn to uphold. From the perspective of someone accessing data that makes them no different from the criminals they are chasing because they are violating constitutional rights. Unalienable rights and that laws can't be unconstitutional.

Democracy isn't driving around in a tank. Democracy is a fragile girl, vulnerable walking down the street in a bad neighbourhood, Burr and Feinstein are the creepy ones offering her a ride.

Re:They are avoiding the right way

[HeckRuler]

I already am on the record for defending your rights for *access* to encryption technology and the last thing I want is anybody oppressed.

Then what the fuck is this:

The right way is to have an office of the judicature maintain a set of third party keys

That's you, being "on the record" as advocating they COMPLETELY fuck it up. That exact thing has been tried before. The Clipper Chip. It was a clusterfuck. Know your history. Poking a hole in everyone's locks does NOT make anyone safer. As those holes will most assuredly be compromised, your reducing the security of a lot of people and giving out sensitive information to hackers and terrorists.

You have advocated people no longer having the right to hard encryption, but instead only having access to SHIT encryption full of mandated holes. The one looking like a cunt here is you.

If you had read and understood the law you would understand that most western countries *already* have means in which to control access to encryption

And if you recall, the source code for PGP is protected under copyright law and the first amendment as it was published in book form so as to specifically flip the finger to anyone trying to control access to it.

But please, enlighten me. How does the US government control my access to GPG? It's a handy dandy little tool that I can go get and verify and use to my hearts content. Legally.