Slashdot Mirror
FBI Tells Congress It Needs Hackers To Keep Up With Tech Company Encryption (buzzfeed.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from BuzzFeed: A high ranking technology official with the FBI told members of Congress Tuesday that the agency is incapable of cracking locked phones and devices on its own, even with additional resources. Amy Hess, the agency's executive assistant director for science and technology told a panel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that encrypted communications continue to pose a challenge to the American law enforcement, and to the safety of the American public. But when asked by lawmakers to provide a practical solution beyond the FBI's talking points, she said that the cooperation of technology companies would be necessary. According to the New York Times, "The FBI defended its hiring of a third-party company to break into an iPhone used by a gunman in last year's San Bernardino, Calif., mass shooting, telling some lawmakers on Tuesday that it needed to join with partners in the rarefied world of for-profit hackers as technology companies increasingly resist their demands for consumer information." They are stressing the importance of cooperation with tech companies and "third parties" to help fight terrorism, claiming they do not have the capabilities and resources available to crack encrypted devices. Congress is currently debating potential legislation on encryption.
We will keep making more sophisticated encryption. You will not beable to keep pace with our progress. We do not want you in our devices, fuck your laws. Crapfully yours, The internet
Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
I find it strange that nobody seems to mention that law enforcement worked just fine in ancient history when private conversations were not recorded at all. The government could not get a transcript on demand because there was none. Likewise, the government still is unable to read our thoughts. Why should a thought be treated differently when it is expressed in speech or electronically through writing? Why should the government feel hamstrung by inability to read our encrypted written thoughs when it still can not read them while they reside in our heads? Should we not demand that both be treated as private without question and inaccessible to government extortion? Law enforcement has done just fine without reading our thoughs for centuries; it should do just fine in the future without reading our encrypted letters.
Should it come to any surprise that the people they need don't want to work for the government? Or fled to Berlin to escape a similar fate?
If you keep backdooring encryption and ostracizing your own citizens who are strong on security, you can't expect to have any citizens who particularly want to help you out.
You can't just throw warm bodies at the problem like you can with traditional war. The Germans lost Einstein and countless other academic Jews to countries like the United States and Russia in WW2, and now the same thing is happening with security experts in the United States. Good luck with that.
moox. for a new generation.
Most hackers would not compromise their ethics enough for the FBI
I've worked in information security for a long time. I 've spoken with colleagues at various government agencies and learned that indeed they don't have a expertise far beyond what's available in the private sector; the movies are as fictional in that respect as they are in others. They do need assistance from the private side of the infosec community.
Fifteen years ago, I would have been happy to assist those who protect and serve if they were working on some actual crime, such as a murder case I was once contacted about. Since Snowden and other events, it's become quite clear that the federal government is not the good guys, for any definition of "good guys".
There's no single solution, but there is one thing that would really help. Prior to 9/11, international spy agencies such as the NSA were prohibited from sharing information with domestic police at agencies such as the FBI. The thinking was that the techniques and mindset used against our enemies, such as North Korea, shouldn't be used against our own citizens. After 9/11 it was determined (correctly) that the prohibition on cooperation made it more difficult to defend against attacks, so the rules were weakened or eliminated and cooperation between intelligence and law enforcement was encouraged. We need to put those walls back in place. Yes it will make defending against attacks more difficult, but it's worth it because the alternative turns out to be having the NSA and FBI attacking the citizens.