Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

insidesources.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 312 posts

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#51

Post by ams6110 »

ndm00 wrote: post #31

This issue brings up a larger point that many in the tech world have ignored for awhile. Now that end to end encryption is easily accessible by everyone, how do the authorities figure out beforehand when a terrorist attack will take place? The answer is not banning encryption technologies or giving authorities a 'key' as the FBI director has proposed. But now authorities have a very difficult problem on their hands.…

The "smart" bad guys (most aren't, but some are) have been communicating covertly all the time. Avoiding electronic communictation entirely, using dead drops, trusted couriers, etc. You catch them by infiltrating their organizations, turning members into double-agents by bribery or blackmail, etc. the way it's always been done.

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#54

Post by Natanael_L »

melling wrote: post #18
donkeyd wrote: post #4

Even without having encryption in main stream applications, like WhatsApp, it's child's play to communicate secretly. There are so many open source applications that allow you to do this, it wouldn't even be a speed bump for criminals. Targeting main stream applications only hurts main stream users. NYT should write an article about that.

You seem to be overlooking the obvious argument that if a small group of people use encryption, then you greatly reduce the number of messages that you need to flag. Furthermore, if someone on a Watch List starts using encryption then perhaps you have an imminent problem. I'm not on the side of reading messages but you missed the real argument being made. Typical HN. How about someone answering the argument that will…

Assuming the numbers wouldn't go up from people encrypting out of spite

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#55

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

fukusa wrote: post #49
GrinningFool wrote: post #37

Increasingly we're seeing 'encryption' discussed in mainstream media as a tool that can only be used for nefarious ends. Kind of like how they talked about "cookies" in the late 90s and early 00s. It's unfortunate that there's no way [without a lot of money] to launch a campaign that highlights the fact that most sensitive online transactions rely on encryption - banking, purchasing, etc - to protect you from The Bad…

We have to get rid of this narrative of bad versus good people while we're at it. It removes every bit of nuance from the discussion.

Unfortunately this is a very widespread notion in culture and is helped by major religions.

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#56

Post by throwaway2048 »

golergka wrote: post #30
mtgx wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you think unproven hearsay in NYT that we all ought to take for granted is "reasonable". If the authorities believe it was the encryption to blame, then they should come out and say it outright - with details, of course. They shouldn't hide under the "anonymous officials" tag which "believe" it was encryption the culprit that stopped them from learning about the attacks, and nothing else. It could've been ju…

What's wrong with newspaper reporting hearsay, while describing it as hearsay? NYT didn't seem to pass it as anything else than it is. What's your logic here? Should all anonymous sources be banned? Or only the sources with opinions that you don't like?

the NYT was instrumental in printing outright lies leading up to the Iraq war for instance, we absolutely should not trust unidentified sources from them when there is a clear political motive at play.

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#58

Post by copperred »

fukusa wrote: post #49
GrinningFool wrote: post #37

Increasingly we're seeing 'encryption' discussed in mainstream media as a tool that can only be used for nefarious ends. Kind of like how they talked about "cookies" in the late 90s and early 00s. It's unfortunate that there's no way [without a lot of money] to launch a campaign that highlights the fact that most sensitive online transactions rely on encryption - banking, purchasing, etc - to protect you from The Bad…

We have to get rid of this narrative of bad versus good people while we're at it. It removes every bit of nuance from the discussion.

That's the point. What the Paris attackers did makes them bad people. It's not up for debate.

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#59

Post by 13of40 »

eterm wrote: post #20
donkeyd wrote: post #4

Even without having encryption in main stream applications, like WhatsApp, it's child's play to communicate secretly. There are so many open source applications that allow you to do this, it wouldn't even be a speed bump for criminals. Targeting main stream applications only hurts main stream users. NYT should write an article about that.

Or to put it another way, "If you outlaw encryption, only outlaws will have encryption"

I heard that you can download plans for encryption from the internet and build it secretly in your basement with widely available tools.

Re: Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack

#60

Post by ceejayoz »

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #46
madmulita wrote: post #13

I blame prime numbers, even co-primes should be banned. Please contact your representative and help us free the world from evil math.

I blame it on unicode. Without unicode these terrorists would not be able to communicate with impunity.

In fairness, character encoding is clearly the work of terrorists.
Post reply on HN