Slashdot Mirror
DOJ: Strong Encryption That We Don't Have Access To Is 'Unreasonable' (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Just two days after the FBI said it could not get into the Sutherland Springs shooter's seized iPhone, Politico Pro published a lengthy interview with a top Department of Justice official who has become the "government's unexpected encryption warrior." According to the interview, which was summarized and published in transcript form on Thursday for subscribers of the website, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein indicated that the showdown between the DOJ and Silicon Valley is quietly intensifying. "We have an ongoing dialogue with a lot of tech companies in a variety of different areas," he told Politico Pro. "There's some areas where they are cooperative with us. But on this particular issue of encryption, the tech companies are moving in the opposite direction. They're moving in favor of more and more warrant-proof encryption." "I want our prosecutors to know that, if there's a case where they believe they have an appropriate need for information and there is a legal avenue to get it, they should not be reluctant to pursue it," Rosenstein said. "I wouldn't say we're searching for a case. I''d say we're receptive, if a case arises, that we would litigate."
In the interview, Rosenstein also said he "favors strong encryption." "I favor strong encryption, because the stronger the encryption, the more secure data is against criminals who are trying to commit fraud," he explained. "And I'm in favor of that, because that means less business for us prosecuting cases of people who have stolen data and hacked into computer networks and done all sorts of damage. So I'm in favor of strong encryption." "This is, obviously, a related issue, but it's distinct, which is, what about cases where people are using electronic media to commit crimes? Having access to those devices is going to be critical to have evidence that we can present in court to prove the crime. I understand why some people merge the issues. I understand that they're related. But I think logically, we have to look at these differently. People want to secure their houses, but they still need to get in and out. Same issue here." He later added that the claim that the "absolutist position" that strong encryption should be by definition, unbreakable, is "unreasonable." "And I think it's necessary to weigh law enforcement equities in appropriate cases against the interest in security," he said.
In the interview, Rosenstein also said he "favors strong encryption." "I favor strong encryption, because the stronger the encryption, the more secure data is against criminals who are trying to commit fraud," he explained. "And I'm in favor of that, because that means less business for us prosecuting cases of people who have stolen data and hacked into computer networks and done all sorts of damage. So I'm in favor of strong encryption." "This is, obviously, a related issue, but it's distinct, which is, what about cases where people are using electronic media to commit crimes? Having access to those devices is going to be critical to have evidence that we can present in court to prove the crime. I understand why some people merge the issues. I understand that they're related. But I think logically, we have to look at these differently. People want to secure their houses, but they still need to get in and out. Same issue here." He later added that the claim that the "absolutist position" that strong encryption should be by definition, unbreakable, is "unreasonable." "And I think it's necessary to weigh law enforcement equities in appropriate cases against the interest in security," he said.
"I don't understand how strong encryption works" - Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
#DeleteChrome
We have a problem that the FBI is controlled by political ebb and tides.
Not only that, we have people who go around and invoke mono-spaced fonts "just because". It's madness, I tell you!
In a mad world, only the mad are sane.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
There's crystal clear. There's clear. There's ambiguous. There's Chinese Calculus. And then there's you.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Consider the case of Frederick II, an 18th-century king of Prussia. Frederick fancied himself an enlightened monarch, and in some respects he was. On one occasion, he is supposed to have interested himself in the conditions of a Berlin prison. He was escorted through it so that he might speak to the prisoners.
One after the other, the prisoners fell to their knees before him, bewailing their lot and, predictably, protesting their utter innocence of all charges that had been brought against them.
Only one prisoner remained silent, and finally Frederick's curiosity was aroused.
"You," he called. "You, there!"
The prisoner looked up. "Yes, your majesty?"
"Why are you here?"
"Armed robbery, your majesty."
"And are you guilty?"
"Entirely guilty, your majesty. I richly deserve my punishment."
At this Frederick rapped his cane sharply on the ground and said, "Warden, release this guilty wretch at once. I will not have him here in jail where by example he will corrupt all the splendid innocent people who occupy it."
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
No, that's evidence that he is a two-faced scumbag; otherwise known as a typical politician.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
They can't, experts smoke pot and cannot be hired by gov :)
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking