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.

Comments

Finally!

[DaMattster]

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!

Re:Finally!

[ShanghaiBill]

Which US enforcement agency do *you* think believes that the law applies to them?

All of them. If this bill passes (unlikely), it will carry the full force of law. There is no way to "secretly" request/demand an illegal backdoor. If any tech company receives such a request, they can immediately publicize and sue. An NSL provides no protection for a blatantly illegal request.

I know it is popular to be cynical about government secrecy and overreach on Slashdot, but to say that about this bill, which bans an inherently open action, is silly.

Re:Finally!

[BlueStrat]

The NSA has no leverage whatsoever to "blackmail" or "extort". Do you have any idea what the NSA is or what they do? They don't carry guns. They can't arrest or detain. They are a bunch of nerds with computers and stuff. They collect and analyze data.

"Gosh, Congressman! It seems your wife's sister is engaged to a guy whose brother is linked to terror groups! It sure would be bad if this came out right before election night, huh? It also appears your daughter in college has committed serious copyright violations for all those TV shows, movies, and somgs she's pirated...why, there's millions of dollars in fines and serious felony charges possible here! Let's hope some anonymous tipster doesn't alert authorities! Let's rethink this "backdoor prohibition" thing, hmm?"

"Data" is as good as a gun in destroying a person, especially one in public office. It just doesn't directly kill them physically.

Strat

Re:Finally!

[BlueStrat]

"Gosh, Congressman! It seems your wife's sister is engaged to a guy whose brother is linked to terror groups!

1. You watch WAY too many movies. Can you cite even one single example of this sort of extortion actually happening in the last 40 years, by federal law enforcement, against a sitting congressman? Or anything even close to that?
2. Do you really think that a federal bureaucrat has so much of a PERSONAL commitment to getting backdoors, that they are willing to risk spending decades in prison for political extortion?
3. You are talking about Hollywood fantasy levels of corruption and extortion to prevent the passage of this bill. It is even more ridiculous to suppose that this type of extortion would work against tech billionaires like Tim, Larry, and Sergey, after the bill became law, which is what we were talking about.

Tell that to the people Hoover blackmailed while he headed the FBI, tell it to all those serving prison sentences because of "parallel construction" using illegally obtained data.

Twenty years ago you could claim that US TLAs capturing and storing data in bulk on US citizens in the domestic US was crazy-talk, but then Snowden proved that and more.

If you don't think they use the data they gather against key government officials and bureaucrats you're either a fool or playing political games.

Strat

But the Cyber!

[Arkham]

"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".

Re:Conservative here - please get Trump out. Ryan

[Desler]

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.