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

DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

cyberlaw.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 347 posts

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#321

Post by dtech »

SkyBelow wrote: post #252
heartbeats wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom isn't free. I think people have just ought to realize that. People have this idea that free countries are more efficient, which is probably true in the long run, but it's a cop-out to just call it a day there. Once I was in Belarus. It's a heavily authoritarian country, make no mistake. When they had protests against their rigged elections, they traced the phones of everyone who went, then brought them in for…

Would Japan qualify as authoritarian? Yet it is safe to leave things out without watching them, except for umbrellas. There are even places in the US where it is safe enough. I doubt these places are more authoritarian but instead allow such social safety because of other reasons. Authoritarianism can, to some extent, replace those reasons if they are lost, but it replaces them with some sort of mutated social struct…

> Yet it is safe to leave things out without watching them, except for umbrellas.

People have no qualms about stealing umbrellas?

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#322

Post by anonsivalley652 »

dkdk8283 wrote: post #101
btilly wrote: post #14

Why does this say that the DOJ has been pushing for this since 2016? They have been pushing for some variation on this since basically forever. I first became aware of it back under Clinton with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip . And the debate has been essentially the same since. Law enforcement wants to be able to break security, and promises that their super secret, super safe system will provide eve…

Watching old movies from 60s/70s sometimes have scenes where the characters are worried about calls being recorded or otherwise having no privacy. The typical response is “What is this, Russia?” or something similar. Privacy is really important. I will always error on the side of privacy even if that means not everyone bad is caught.

The Conversation (1974)

Three Days of the Condor (1975)

Marathon Man (1976)

Sneakers perhaps.

Anyhow, I think you're missing the context of what happened in the 60's and 70's that stoked paranoia in the culture and in fiction.

1. CCTIFBI

Only because some morally-flexible activists broke into an FBI field office did they uncover COINTELPRO and quoting Chomksy "40% [of FBI work activities] were devoted to political surveillance and the like"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/07/fbi-office-bre...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Commission_to_Inve...

Furthermore, in modern times, there is:

- warrantless mass surveillance (NSA)

- license plate readers (LPRs)

- cellphone tower/position tracking

- Ring and other IoT devices recording to cloud providers evidence of technical crimes. All it takes is law-enforcement getting access for something else and digging around with automated tools in data to round up bodies to prosecute. For example, a small child escaping from a bath without clothes in front of an always-recording security webcam is considered child pornography.

- No-name webcams and other IoT being hacked or manufacturing backdoored to be used for spying, malware injection, packet sniffing and who knows what else.

- As revealed by Snowden, various secret watch lists containing the names of over 2 million Americans.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#323

Post by distances »

craydandy wrote: post #319
distances wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This allows for people to be fired for abusing their access when in reality they are being fire for some other action that isn't nearly as PR friendly to state. TBH sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory. And for what it's worth, at least in Finland getting caught snooping isn't cause for firing people, the convictions have been fines.

Not true. While it has been pretty rare for anyone to get fired over snooping other people's data, there has been several cases where it has been the basis of firing the employee. Especially the health care sector has been sensitive about snooping, see for example [1], article in Finnish. [1] https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-7460193

Good if the more serious cases have bigger consequences. I suppose the fines have been for single offences, whereas this linked case was pretty extensive snooping.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#324

Post by literallycancer »

solotronics wrote: post #197
Karunamon wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean this to sound snippy, but where would you go? Most non-US countries I'm aware of have even worse restrictions around speech, encryption, and so forth.

I have a US and UK passport. I would probably end up in Singapore or a Nordic country? I always figured I would evaluate my options if that time ever came.

Your best bet are countries where people still remember what it's like living under an oppressive regime.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#325

Post by banads »

dropoutcoder wrote: post #239
banads wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like asking how to design a type of water that isn't wet, fire that doesn't burn, or a gun that only kills bad guys. The inherent nature of encryption is to keep information secret.

Two parties or three, how can three parties keep a secret versus two

The only way is to share keys

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#326

Post by trevyn »

Karunamon wrote: post #164
solotronics wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me at least this is the thing that will push me to leave and renounce citizenship. I am sure I represent an insignificant minority to them, but I can't live somewhere without my own security on my data and cryptocurrency. Over the last few years I moved basically all my assets into Bitcoin and have left the legacy banking systems behind. With a few keystrokes they can lock you totally out of all your funds and yo…

I don't mean this to sound snippy, but where would you go? Most non-US countries I'm aware of have even worse restrictions around speech, encryption, and so forth.

Someplace where the government is too weak to care. Most countries with a GDP/capita under $20k qualify.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#327

Post by rasengan »

Retric wrote: post #179
Karunamon wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean this to sound snippy, but where would you go? Most non-US countries I'm aware of have even worse restrictions around speech, encryption, and so forth.

New Zealand has stronger free speech protection than the US and no encryption issues. More freedom of the press and even ‘free’ heathcare for citizens or permanent residents make it a solid contender.

All countries owned by “her majesty” are anti encryption. Look up the Queen of New Zealand - many know but I’m sure some will be surprised.

Sadly, that same world leader is the strongest anti encryption and censorship advocate.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#328

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

boring_twenties wrote: post #317
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really would not be surprised if will surface that Telegram has a backdoor for Russian special services. After Anton Rosenberg's posts [1] and Durov's (very unconvincing) responses, it is clear that Durov lies a lot how Telegram operates, and it is quite likely that all their 'blocking' in Russia is just a show to boost credibility. It also should be noted, that while Telegram markets itself as the most safe and pr…

> BUT IF ONE USES END-TO-END ENCRYPTION, ONE CAN'T ACCESS MESSAGES ON ANOTHER DEVICE, BY DEFINITION!!!!! You can encrypt each message separately for each device, that's still end-to-end encryption.

Yeah, and load it on a completely new device by providing only login and password, too?? (Like Telegram does)

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#329

Post by shadowgovt »

busterarm wrote: post #88
shadowgovt wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A President (and the priorities of his administration) can make bad programs much worse. Take marijuana enforcement as an inverse example. The federal law around marijuana hasn't changed, and it's as illegal in 2020 to use, grow, and sell as it was in 2004. But the Obama administration made clear to the DEA and FBI that pursuit and enforcement of that law in states that had passed their own laws to legalize it would…

That didn't really change enforcement elsewhere and choosing Biden for his VP, who is basically the legal architect of the entire War on Drugs, sent a huge signal. The Obama administration did exactly nothing for prison reform, which coincidentally is probably going to be a big part of Trump's legacy (he's done more on this than any other President), and nothing for situations where marijuana possession suddenly make…

Yep. These are examples of the effects that a President can have on policy I was referring to.

Re: DOJ plans to strike against encryption while the Techlash iron is hot

#330

Post by vanniv »

dtech wrote: post #321
SkyBelow wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would Japan qualify as authoritarian? Yet it is safe to leave things out without watching them, except for umbrellas. There are even places in the US where it is safe enough. I doubt these places are more authoritarian but instead allow such social safety because of other reasons. Authoritarianism can, to some extent, replace those reasons if they are lost, but it replaces them with some sort of mutated social struct…

> Yet it is safe to leave things out without watching them, except for umbrellas. People have no qualms about stealing umbrellas?

Umbrellas frequently get stolen via the self-justification of "I need it, I'll just borrow it" followed by laziness about returning.
Post reply on HN