FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
1–10 of 184 posts
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#2So we've moved from the clipper chip to, prospectively in the near future, the Clapper chip. History is trying to repeat itself, but this time we have legal precedent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States
https://blog.cr.yp.to/20160315-jefferson.html
All this sort of tactic will do is result in irreparable damage to the tech sector and the US economy. No murders, rapes, child abductions, terrorist plots to destroy buildings, or whatever other specters they summon to haunt us will be prevented.
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#3I wonder if anyone has explained to them there is this thing called open-source software. Sure you may be able to convince/force Apple to give you some sort of key escrow system but do you think you can convince the GPG developers?
If you implement key escrow and it's public knowledge that encryption systems that implement it are useless then people that actually want to hide stuff will simply use GPG and other uncompromised systems.
The only thing this sort of system is good for is enhancing the reach of the surveillance apparatus. That is, spying on innocent people. As for why they want to do this.. no-one knows but it's awfully concerning.
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#4So... the FBI is essentially arguing we should all keep our doors unlocked because they have had to do some investigations in the past where they came to a home that was locked and it was hard for them to enter the home.
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#5The FBI director is hanging out on a very long limb and sawing away. Even if you mandated in the US that everyone only use HTTP and no encryption everyone will just use it from other countries. Even if one country on earth has one competent programmer implement one secure framework everyone will use it. This is beating a dead horse long after its been cremated.
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#6Interestingly, the prominent VC Fred Wilson recently came out in favor of this as well, going so far as to label those who believe strong encryption should be legal "absolutists".
Anybody know if USV is investing in a startup that's planning to get the government to mandate the use of broken crypto? Anybody know of startups that are planning to work in this area?
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#7I wonder if anyone has explained to them there is this thing called open-source software. Sure you may be able to convince/force Apple to give you some sort of key escrow system but do you think you can convince the GPG developers? If you implement key escrow and it's public knowledge that encryption systems that implement it are useless then people that actually want to hide stuff will simply use GPG and other uncom…
How many people can be bothered if it's not a turnkey solution?
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#8Rest of the world will just do encryption in their hardware/software. Good luck to USA tech companies if this law will be enforced.
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#9So... the FBI is essentially arguing we should all keep our doors unlocked because they have had to do some investigations in the past where they came to a home that was locked and it was hard for them to enter the home.
Or that you can get a lock on your door, so long as it's one of a short list of locks where they have a spare key.
This has been tried, and works about as well as you might expect: https://theintercept.com/2015/09/17/tsa-doesnt-really-care-l...
Re: FBI Wants It to Be Impractical to Deploy Strong Encryption Without Key Escrow
#10The FBI director is hanging out on a very long limb and sawing away. Even if you mandated in the US that everyone only use HTTP and no encryption everyone will just use it from other countries. Even if one country on earth has one competent programmer implement one secure framework everyone will use it. This is beating a dead horse long after its been cremated.
All you have to do is look at Korean banking to see that Rube Goldberg machines with questionable security practices can easily become standard with the "correct" legal apparatus in place.