Slashdot Mirror


US Efforts To Regulate Encryption Have Been Flawed, Government Report Finds (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via The Guardian: U.S. Republican congressional staff said in a report released Wednesday that previous efforts to regulate privacy technology were flawed and that lawmakers need to learn more about technology before trying to regulate it. The 25-page white paper is entitled Going Dark, Going Forward: A Primer on the Encryption Debate and it does not provide any solution to the encryption fight. However, it is notable for its criticism of other lawmakers who have tried to legislate their way out of the encryption debate. It also sets a new starting point for Congress as it mulls whether to legislate on encryption during the Clinton or Trump administration. "Lawmakers need to develop a far deeper understanding of this complex issue before they attempt a legislative fix," the committee staff wrote in their report. The committee calls for more dialogue on the topic and for more interviews with experts, even though they claim to have already held more than 100 such briefings, some of which are classified. The report says in the first line that public interest in encryption has surged once it was revealed that terrorists behind the Paris and San Bernardino attacks "used encrypted communications to evade detection." Congressman Ted Lieu is pushing the federal government to treat ransomware attacks on medical facilities as data breaches and require notifications of patients.

9 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. FUCK YOU DORKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stop insisting on unbreakable encryption. You're just helping terrorists and criminals while you hurt Americans. If you dorks didn't have anything illegal to hide, you wouldn't use unbreakable encryption. And no, I'm not worried about identity theft. I use Lifelock and, therefore, am immune from this.

  2. Develop a far deeper understanding by RabidReindeer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If legislators ever bothered to try and understand anything before passing laws about it, government as we know it would cease to exist.

    1. Re:Develop a far deeper understanding by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we (as a species) will have some system of government where experts in their field are the ones who decide how best to regulate that field

      That's what we have in the financial industry now. Almost all of our financial regulations have been written by people who make their living in the field.

      Don't assume that expertise means caring what's best for society. It just means you know what's best for you. Technocracy can be an express train to dystopia.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  3. right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doin by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Once the FBI started subverting TOR (developed by the Naval Research Lab to promote FREEDOM), hacking people's computers without warrents and demanding user data from ISPs without warrants, the US became a bad internet citizen and a de facto rogue state.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  4. But the Paris attackers DIDNT use encryption by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Paris attackers did NOT use encryption!
    They used burner phones.
    The TLA's just tried to use encryption as the reason why their spy machines didn't detect squat, and to try force new encryption laws down peoples throats.

    --
    There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    1. Re:But the Paris attackers DIDNT use encryption by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was going to say that but you beat me to it. The Paris attackers used burner phones and SMS. Unencrypted SMS. If worldwide police agencies can't detect the digital equivalent of postcards being sent through the mail, what makes them think that a) terrorists will care enough to go through the trouble to encrypt their communications and b) they could even find the supposedly encrypted messages when they're just tossing more hay on the pile while searching for the same needle.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  5. Re:FTA: by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Informative

    They are more blurry than "Western Governments are good guys/other governments and hackers are bad guys", but the overall point is that even if you COULD trust all western governments to never abuse their encryption backdoor (a huge assumption), the mere presence of a backdoor would lead to hackers exploiting it. And, walking back the assumption, let's say you (for some reason) trust the current administration with an encryption backdoor. Do you trust the next one with it? What about the one after that? How long until an administration comes along that abuses the backdoor (whether Nixon-Whitewater level abuse or slowly encroaching on what is acceptable abuse)?

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  6. Re:I'd like to... by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some perspective, people; we've had encryption in use for over 40 years, and the actual amount of people using it to escape prosecution is almost none.

    Encryption has been around for much longer than 40 years!

    "The earliest known text containing components of cryptography originates in the Egyptian town Menet Khufu on the tomb of nobleman Khnumhotep II nearly 4,000 years ago."
    -- "Past, Present, and Future Methods of Cryptography ", http://www.eng.utah.edu/~nmcdo...

  7. Really? No kidding! by bravecanadian · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good luck regulating math, morons.