Slashdot Mirror


Germany Preparing Law for Backdoors in Any Type of Modern Device (bleepingcomputer.com)

Catalin Cimpanu, writing for BleepingComputer: German authorities are preparing a law that will force device manufacturers to include backdoors within their products that law enforcement agencies could use at their discretion for legal investigations. The law would target all modern devices, such as cars, phones, computers, IoT products, and more. Officials are expected to submit their proposed law for debate this week, according to local news outlet RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND). The man supporting this proposal is Thomas de Maiziere, Germany's Interior Minister, who cites the difficulty law enforcement agents have had in past months investigating the recent surge of terrorist attacks and other crimes.

12 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. Ok.. by Drathos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not ban all security on devices while you're at it?

    --
    End of line..
  2. Obligatory Stasi remark by dyfet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And I had thought east germany had joined west germany, not the other way around...

    1. Re:Obligatory Stasi remark by blahplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Call me old-fashioned but I can't help considering someone ridiculous who apparently gets all his knowledge from Youtube videos. No matter what message you've got, I didn't even check it and don't care, try reading some books first. You can find them in the library.

      Uhh you do know the first video is former national security advisor of the united states? AKA someone with serious foreign policy credibility, he's been giving speeches everywhere and talking about his concern for the political awakening of the publics of the world. The reality is the rich are exploiting everyone else and that has elites concerned because it's starting to become obvious the elites have always been robbing the world and the rule of law is a myth. That's the reality, otherwise he wouldn't call the political awakening of the masses a "menace", aka a menace to their profits.

      In his 1970 book Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, Brzezinski wrote the following.

      "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."

      Between two ages

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski

      From war is a racket:

      "I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil intersts in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."[p. 10]

      "War is a racket. ...It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." [p. 23]

      "The general public shoulders the bill [for war]. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations." [p. 24]

      General Butler is especially trenchant when he looks at post-war casualties. He writes with great emotion about the thousands of traumatised soldiers, many of who lose their minds and are penned like animals until they die, and he notes that in his time, returning veterans are three times more likely to die prematurely than those who stayed home.

      War is a racket

      He wrote this on american empire, aka the rich (big business) vs the rest of mankind.

      The grand chessboard

      The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives

      Grand chessboard user review

  3. Re: Define by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If we lose all personal privacy, then the terrorists have won.

  4. Has anybody told them they're idiots? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first people to get the backdoors will be cops.

    The second people will the in organized crime. It'll only take one bad law enforcement employee on their payroll to leak it... and THAT is just if there's some kind of key involved. The system itself will be public before the first device is even sold, since the standards will have to be given to the manufactures and they're going to leak like sieves.

    Then you'll have a nation of devices that are completely untrustworthy. In theory... because in practice this is so obviously too stupid to work that they can't possibly go forward with it.

    1. Re:Has anybody told them they're idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      " In theory... because in practice this is so obviously too stupid to work that they can't possibly go forward with it."

      And people pacifying themselves with sentiments like these are how these theories are put into practice.

  5. Good! by Kenja · · Score: 2, Insightful

    SOMETHING has to slow down the German economy before they own us all. Chasing out all technology would do it.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  6. Re: Define by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Incorrect. The only people that lose are people who are not terrorists. Terrorists will simply use methods which are 100% immune to this law - which are plentiful. The end result, as with gun control, is that the only people who lose are good, lawful people. In the end, the only winners are tyrants and terrorists - and the stupid who believe the easily invalidated propaganda.

    Not to mention it means that these devices become engineered to facilitate hacking. Which now means everyone is now vulnerable to blackmail, extortion, kidnapping, or simply exploitation, and any number of other crimes. Again, bringing us full circle that the only winners are tyrants and terrorists.

    Only the very ignorant, very stupid, or very evil, support this type of move. As for Merkel, it's because she's very evil. She openly advocates the murder and displacement (even complete replacement) of the German people. Just as Obama and Hillary advocate for America - and all the other evil, globalist leaders in the Western world are currently doing.

  7. Re: Define by meerling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    NOBODY in security EVER thinks a backdoor is a good thing!
    They are a MASSIVE vulnerability just waiting to get cracked, and if they are mandatory, all it takes is a single slip and that entire group is totally unprotected!
    It's not a question of IF it will be used and abused, but simply WHEN

    Sorry for the caps, but I really wanted to highlight those specific words to get across the point to some of the readers.

  8. Thomas, I usually sell good IT security advice by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    because my job. This one's free. First of all, I might eventually be affected by that bullshit if it spreads and second, it's always a pleasure belittling you and showing you just how big an idiot you really are.

    First and foremost, there is no such thing as a "government only" backdoor. A backdoor is or is not. A backdoor that MUST be in EVERY device, independent of maker and the kind of device is by definition a high profile target for every hacker on this planet. Everyone wants to have that. That includes every state actor. I.e. other nations WILL want to have that backdoor. Now, of course you might share it with friends. It's unlikely that you want to share it with states like, say, North Korea or that Daesh idiots (that's ISIS for you, in case you didn't keep up with the news). Yes, Thomas, you're about to give terrorists a tool to invade German devices.

    Way to go, aren't you supposedly at least kinda-sorta responsible for the internal security of the state?

    How they get it you ask? Are you kidding? We're talking about the universal key to EVERY computer in your country. Every private, every corporate, every government system. You think a state actor (especially a rogue state actor) would shy away from kidnapping someone's family if he as much as MIGHT have access to the relevant keys? Here's your wife, Thomas, here is your kids. Hand over the keys and don't talk about it or, well, I spare you the details.

    And even worse, you won't get what you want to get, Thomas. Because you don't think that anyone outside of Germany would as much as touch a device with a "German backdoor" installed, do you? Twice so if a state actor. No. Outside of Germany, you'll get secure devices (well, more or less... but at least not deliberately insecured ones). It is trivial, not only to me because that's what I do for a living, but to everyone with at least a minimum knowledge of IT to diff a "good" and one of your "bad" devices to see what's different between them. And what's different between them is your backdoor. It is now also trivial to patch such a security hole in a way that you'll be locked out again. And you can rest assured that every terrorist on the planet will make sure to plug that and lock you out.

    Thomas. Again. Usually, I sell good advice. This one is actually free. Stop that idiocy before it costs you your job. I kinda like your party. Even though you're a grade A moron.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Re: Define by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    EU.

    How much you willing to bet that if Germany succeeds here, they'll push for an EU-wide version?

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  10. Re: Define by quenda · · Score: 3, Insightful

    as with gun control, is that the only people who lose are good, lawful people.

    Germany is not the US. Sure organised criminals can obtain guns, but you have very little chance of being shot when stumbling across a burglar in places like Germany. I call that a win.