Slashdot Mirror
New York DA Wants Apple, Google To Roll Back Encryption (tomsguide.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. called on Apple and Google to weaken their device encryption, arguing that thousands of crimes remained unsolved because no one can crack into the perpetrators' phones. Vance, speaking at the International Conference on Cyber Security here, said that law enforcement officials did not need an encryption "backdoor," sidestepping a concern of computer-security experts and device makers alike. Instead, Vance said, he only wanted the encryption standards rolled back to the point where the companies themselves can decrypt devices, but police cannot. This situation existed until September 2014, when Apple pushed out iOS 8, which Apple itself cannot decrypt. "Tim Cook was absolutely right when he told his shareholders that the iPhone changed the world," Vance said. "It's changed my world. It's letting criminals conduct their business with the knowledge we can't listen to them."
So what you can't listen to them? Have these guys never heard of police work? Here's a hint, it's not synonymous with spying. If you can't follow the money, them the crime is probably too petty to worry about.
Devil's advocate: How were crimes committed before cell phones? The old telephone system could be tapped. Letters could be intercepted. If people had to meet physically, they could be followed physically. These channels of communication are decreasing in popularity and are being replaced by a system that isn't as easy to spy on. This is probably a good thing overall, but it's making it more difficult for law enforcement to do that part of their jobs.
Many law enforcement leaders are acting as if no crimes can be solved unless all cell phones are made more vulnerable.
Are they? It looks like they're actually complaining that many crimes will not be solved unless all cell phones are made more vulnerable. There's a tradeoff here, and while it may very well be the case that the decision most consistent with American values is to value privacy over law enforcement efficiency, I don't believe we help the discussion by misrepresenting this district attorney's position.
This DA seems to be implying that pre-iPhone, his predecessors closed all their cases.
That kind of track record doesn't bode well for him. Is that really something he should be calling attention to? That his predecessors got results, but that his current office doesn't.
Apple, Google want New York DA to roll back police shootings.
Guess neither of them gets what they want, right?
A security guy (admittedly someone random on the internet) mentioned the relative ease with which criminals can make their own communications and storage apps (or have them made). Apps which due to their custom nature render trying to strongarm the (now sidelined) 'big guys' into weakening their encryption completely useless.
In fact, the possibilities for any serious criminal network to create their own secure communications channels and data storage are so mindbogglingly vast that the only criminals the current situation is 'letting [...] conduct their business' are pretty obviously small time or just stupid drug dealers. Hardly the type of criminals envisioned when urged to give up the basic human right of privacy.