Slashdot Mirror
Lawmakers Move To Block Government From Ordering Digital 'Back Doors' (thehill.com)
A bipartisan group of House lawmakers have introduced legislation that would block the federal government from requiring technology companies to design devices with so-called "back doors" to allow law enforcement to access them. From a report: The bill represents the latest effort by lawmakers in Congress to wade into the battle between federal law enforcement officials and tech companies over encryption, which reached a boiling point in 2015 as the FBI tussled with Apple over a locked iPhone linked to the San Bernardino terror attack case.
Top FBI and Justice Department officials have repeatedly complained that they have been unable to access devices for ongoing criminal investigations because of encryption. FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a "back door." The bipartisan bill introduced Thursday would prohibit federal agencies from requiring or requesting that firms "design or alter the security functions in its product or service to allow the surveillance of any user of such product or service, or to allow the physical search of such product" by the government.
Top FBI and Justice Department officials have repeatedly complained that they have been unable to access devices for ongoing criminal investigations because of encryption. FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a "back door." The bipartisan bill introduced Thursday would prohibit federal agencies from requiring or requesting that firms "design or alter the security functions in its product or service to allow the surveillance of any user of such product or service, or to allow the physical search of such product" by the government.
Finally some good is being done. This will put the kibosh on the issue for good and silence federal law enforcement. No good comes from weakening encryption or building in back doors; quite the opposite. It's not a matter of if but when the backdoors get discovered and become used for nefarious purposes. I am glad this has bipartisan support, and since it does, the likelihood of it getting passed is that much stronger. We don't need to live in any more of a surveillance state than we already do. It's one thing if the FBI or whatever other LEO agency discovers a vulnerability and exploits it. Hey this does happen. It's a whole other thing to have secret back doors built in. No! Just no!
I like it.
Massie is the best member of Congress, and a phenomenal troll. Massie 2024!
Or push for immunity from prosecution when they DO illegally backdoor products, like they have been for 20+ years now (Go read up on the cisco and juniper backdoors, and I think a few of the smaller players too!)
Notice how the politicians involved are not the "Big Guys".
I have one foot in cynicism and the other in hope.
Maybe the future in our country is to get rid of the old guard?
I'll start, as a Liberal - Nancy Pelosi can go. Yes, yes, yes...I know. That's like saying, "Go ahead, take my dogs! Here's the rabid one. We're good? Right?"
Or how about getting rid of Mitch McConnell? That SOB needs to go.
Paul Ryan is FINALLY going. I mean really?
How about a bipartisan colon cleanse here?
We can get together people!
And the media Trolls. I offer up Bill Maher - total Dick!
How about offering up Sean Hannity - total dick?!
"The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe, it's hardly doable."
I know I personally feel great entrusting the security of the American people to a bunch of geriatrics who worry about "the cyber".
- Vincit qui patitur.
Encryption is the only practical way to be private.. It is not just a 'man in the middle' problem but a 'government in the middle' problem.
I'm a conservative. #NeverTrump
Virtually all congresscritters vote on all the bills without ever reading most of them, especially budgets. I only know of one representative in Congress who has ever read a federal budget. Paul Ryan WROTE, not just read, multiple federal budgets. For any and every congresscritter, I can find areas where we disagree as to the best policy. Ryan is no exception, I don't fully agree with anyone, on everything. He is also by far the best informed, smartest person we've had in Congress in many years. And squeaky clean on ethics. Whikle he doesn't always come to the same conclusions I do, his conclusions are based on *really* knowing his stuff, knowing wtf he's talking about. Frankly, me disagreeing with Paul Ryan about federal policy is like me disagreeing with Stephen Hawking about physics theories - we both have our own opinions; one of us knows wtf they are talking about it, and it isn't me.
Paul Ryan's departure will hurt the country when he's replaced with another "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" person.
I also want to see:
1. Mandatory Disclosure of KNOWN security bugs in a consumer product by any governmental entity, First to the manufacturer for a designated "Fix" period, after which, all vulnerability details shall be available to the public through FOIA request.
2. NO HORDING DEVICE OR SERVICE EXPLOITS: A security researcher, company, member of law enforcement, government, or any other party having accidentally, or intentionally: a successful defeat for a security measure on any common consumer product, OR public service must minimize the amount of proprietary or other users' data exposed during any proof of concept testing, and make minimal efforts to fully disclose their activities and all details of potential vulnerabilities to the operator of the service within 15 days of discovery, or they shall be deemed liable for holding means of fraudulent access with intent to commit a crime and fined the estimated value of the exploit not less than $10000 for a natural person, and not less than $100,000 for other persons.
3. Prohibition against selling for a profit, importing, trafficking in, or incorporating PAID security exploits, PAID software, or COMMERCIAL devices that are designed with a specific built-in function to defeat security measures or intercept data by falsifying network or over-the-air signals or "impersonating" another device into a commercial product, or conducting security exploits in the course of business, except if the course of business is pentesting and the exploit is used in the course of business against ONLY systems fully owned by the customer within the scope of a security testing engagement, OR If the complete source code for all software and design specifications for all hardware and details of all exploits are disclosed to the public 30 days prior to the sale or release of the commercial product.
4. Mandated Disclosures by MANUFACTURERS of the existence of ALL intentional security backdoors and remote means of access into any consumer or commercial smart phone, computer, appliance, or network device with criminal penalties for failing, AND public disclosure of any foreign governments or persons/organizations outside the manufacturer or outside the US that will have Access Credentials, Backdoor Access Procedures, Security Keys, or other Digital Signing or Decryption keys that are significant and could be used to exploit a device.
Frankly, me disagreeing with Paul Ryan about federal policy is like me disagreeing with Stephen Hawking about physics theories - we both have our own opinions; one of us knows wtf they are talking about it, and it isn't me.
This is a joke, right? Paul Ryan is a mental midget. You’d have to have below-average intelligence if you think Ryan is smarter.
Yes, this is a continuation of an effort that began when some in Congress thought that the FBI was lying to them about their efforts to force Apple to crack a phone.
The reps who introduced this bill are:
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) introduced the legislation along with Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ted Poe (R-Texas).
Reps involved starting in April were:
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Ted Poe (R-Texas), Jared Polis (D-Col.), Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
I don't think many people here are buying what you're selling. Still, I would take Ryan over that crack head Pelosi anyday.
No,
This is congresscritters responding to their funders. This has jack shit to do wtih you, your privacy, law enforcement, or national security. This is all about unaccountable international corporations being unaccountable for what they do. Apple has signing keys. They can extract whatever they want. They've clearly caved to the Chinese.
There aren't two. There aren't three.
Focus on the ones you know about and the ones you don't know about are going to require backdoors anyway, and just make stuff happen to corporations that don't provide them.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The US Government has no jurisdiction over the laws of mathematics. You can always layer real encryption over whatever scheme they come up with. They will always lose.
Did I fall asleep and wake up in the twilight zone or something? Lawmakers... in the US... doing something reasonable? That just doesn't seem right.
Remember AT&T installed traffic monitoring equipment in their San Francisco switching office at the behest of the NSA?
Illegal under FISA.
In 2008 Bush signed the FISA Amendments Act which granted retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies for past violations of FISA.
"FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a “back door.” "
Is this guy serious? That IS the definition of a "back door". You can't demand/"recommend" that companies leave a gaping hole in their devices security with the sole intent to allow government officials/agencies to search said device and NOT call it a back door. It's somewhat disturbing that things have gotten so bad that politicians/bureaucrats can actually get away with saying that kind of crap.
Regurgitating crusty old Ayn Rand ideas makes someone smart? You must have a low bar of what you consider makes someone smart.
bipartisan - the signal that a larger than usual deception is being enacted.
Paul Ryan WROTE, not just read, multiple federal budgets.
How many balanced budgets has he written?
He authored seven budget bills. I don't have time to check all of them, but I was curious enough to check two. Maybe you'll want to check the others. I checked fiscal year 2015 and 2017. Both of those are balanced budget plans. Care to check a couple others and let me know what you find?
Bill probably knows this already, but for those who don't, the federal government plans spending over a 10-year period, for two reasons. First, this slightly reduces the extent of "buy it this year, pay for it three years later" that happens - the budget proposals show costs over the next ten years. Also, it provides some predictability and stability. A "budget cut" doesn't mean an agency gets less money than it got last year, it means their increase is less than the increase that they've been planning on over the last 10 years.
Like all federal budget proposals, those written by Speaker Ryan were over a 10-year period, and balanced the budget over that time frame. To make THIS YEAR balance would require a sudden 40% cut to every agency, based on the plans they'd been given over the last ten years.
FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that devices could be designed to allow investigators to access them, though he insists the bureau is not looking for a "back door."
This guy clearly has no idea what a back door is, cuz he wants one, but then he doesn't, in the same sentence.
And we're entrusting these guys with sensitive national security secrets and such? Ouch.
And knowing Congress, they'll find a way to mess this up.
raymorris is smoking the crackpipe again. Everyone knows that Paul Ryan is a K-Street boy. It's his self-proclaimed job to fuck over main street
Backdoors are banned from all computers and devices except those not belonging to governments, intelligence agencies, police forces, military forces.
No, seriously. The Federal government has had effectively zero capability to tell other companies how to design their products or how to build them, unless they were actively hurting people.
The CPSC even has rules regarding this.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
They've just now introduced the bill. There's no evidence they even mentioned it to Rand Paul yet. They should, and I'm sure they will.
Rand Paul understands the issues around encryption and says clearly that weakening the encryption would not only be stupid, but have Constitutional issues as well.
https://www.randpaul.com/news/...
I thought Ron Paul was kinda kooky - I wondered if he was a Coast to Coast AM listener, but I like Rand Paul so far.
If it wasn't clear above, they just introduced this bill in House of Representatives. Rand Paul is a Senator. The bill has a long way to go before Paul would be looking at it.
What's wrong with these leading democratic women again? the main argument against them is years of attacks from republicans.
A method for end users to rekey the devices signature authentication mechanism, and a requirement that retroactively all private signing keys must be released when a product is EOLed, 5 years after date of first manufacture, or when the company has not produced a software update in more than a year.
Do that and we can finally have modestly secure and end user authenticatable devices for all but intentionally designed hardware/prom firmware backdoors.
Finish that last sentence, please. Smarter than who?
We aren't debating Ryan's intelligence, don't you see? This is about his relative intelligence compared to Congress. Think about who is able to read and who isn't, for example. Ryan is literate. Can you name another Congressperson who is literate? It's not easy.
So the government is blocking the government?
What a relief. Nothing to worry about here.
Just out of curiosity, how much were you paid for that, and by whom?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Paul Ryan wrote seven federal budgets. Can you name another congresscritter who so much as "read* even one budget bill?
Take your time, I'll wait.
No, but I understand why you might think so.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/opinion/paul-ryan-hypocrite.html
Cheap storage VM.
The article you linked says the journalist disagrees with Ryan on economic policy. Okay, cool. As I mentioned, I also disagree with him on policy often enough.
The journalist does not claim, and could not make a case, that Ryan isn't one of the smartest and best informed politicians we've had in decades.
Again, I can disagree with Stephen Hawking's theory. I can't reasonably say Hawking has no idea what he's talking about. That would be silly. Most Congresscriyters have no idea what they're talking about. They don't even read the bills, much less understand them.
> I'd imagine the read them.
I imagine that Rihanna seduces me.
You *could* look up the actual facts I'm under two minutes instead of imagining things and then believing that it must be true because you imagined it.
That article was the kindest I could find. Paul Ryan is informed like doctors are informed by drug reps. He only seems to care about his own idealism and he is either an outright liar, easily manipulated, or kind of stupid. We can argue about which it is, but one of those is true.
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/11/...
Cheap storage VM.
As you may know, John Sununu is widely known as having one of the highest IQs ever measured. A member of Mega Society, Sununu scored higher than Stephen Hawking and other well-known geniuses on the standard high IQ test.
In order to support your claim that Ryan is stupid, you linked to a ranting article with very few facts, but one of the few facts it mentions is this gem: ...
--
Ryan emerged as a player by sponsoring, along with then-Sen. John Sununu
---
Well gee, if Paul Ryan agrees with and collaborates with one of the smartest men alive, he must be a moron.
Keep talking, you're hilarious. Keep on linking, this is fun.