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

An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

cyberlaw.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 367 posts

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#121

Post by fastball »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #96
pensatoio wrote: post #17

These bills terrify me. A lot of stuff happens in politics that’s frustrating, and much of it doesn’t catch my attention. There’s something about the pure ignorance that goes into breaking encryption that I can’t comprehend. I can understand when bills come through and the extreme differences in opinion are the result of different interpretations of facts and truth, but when it comes to encryption, there is no safe p…

Whats worst is these should all be entirely illegal. Its literally warrantless searching.

I'm not sure that's entirely a reasonable comparison.

The idea behind strong (especially E2E) encryption is that even with a warrant, the information in question is entirely inaccessible.

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#122

Post by alkonaut »

el_don_almighty wrote: post #110
tomcooks wrote: post #72

Please stop voting dumbasses in the US, it affects everyone living in countries who have commercial agreements with then

If you don't like the idiots in Congress... then run for office. Engage in the civic process. Why aren't there more nerds and programmers in Congress? We should be there

We are. We just aren't americans, so we are counting on Americans to vote (or engage in the process). Thanks in advance!

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#123

Post by bluescarni »

mjburgess wrote: post #62
bluescarni wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fascism was a direct result of, and contingent upon, the mass death and poverty caused by WWI. That is grossly wrong. There was no "mass death and poverty" in Italy during or after WWI.

wtf are you talking about? Half a million Italians died in WW1. And as many again from the spanish flu. And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970. You do not get Russian communism without the prolonged period of slavery called "serfdom" which persisted into the late 19th C. in russia. You do not get fascism in italy w…

The Italian deaths in WW1 were overwhelmingly soldier deaths, as the fighting on Italian soil was limited to north-east border of the country (where incidentally I am from). The civilian population was largely unaffected by the war.

> And as many again from the spanish flu.

Who talked about flu? You were talking about WW1, now you are pivoting to the flu?

> And all of Europe was in a permanent condition of poverty until way into the 20th C. 80% of the population was poor working class even in 1970.

This is also grossly wrong. I suggest you better inform yourself about the 20-th century history of European societies before spouting more nonsense.

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#124

Post by smolder »

fastball wrote: post #121
giancarlostoro wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats worst is these should all be entirely illegal. Its literally warrantless searching.

I'm not sure that's entirely a reasonable comparison. The idea behind strong (especially E2E) encryption is that even with a warrant, the information in question is entirely inaccessible.

Yes, the same as any unrecorded conversation is inaccessible by warrant after it happens. Law enforcement doesn't need omniscience, but we do need freedom to associate and privacy in a democracy.

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#125

Post by b112 »

tomklein wrote: post #64

Democratic nations are drifting more and more away from the wills of their people. How can this be changed?

Are they?

Or, are the viewpoints of those in Westwrn nations more diverse?

In the "old days", opinion was often formed by highly controlled sources, compared to internet standards.

TV, radio, newspapers, magazines were created entirely from within (for example) the US, with strong editorial control.

Now, one person with a divergent view can spread said view nation wide, regardless of from where they hail.

So, I contend that views are more divergent now, more varied. And with that, comes a greater difficulty in crafting laws which "almost all" agree with.

How do you support the will of the people, when there is no collective will?

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#126

Post by WinstonSmith84 »

When thinking, it's ironic the concerns the US is having with Huawei and Chinese potentially spying on us. Americans are not even trying anymore to pretend they don't do the same, they just want exclusivity without having to bother wasting resources decrypting communications...

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#127

Post by jbotz »

tomklein wrote: post #64

Democratic nations are drifting more and more away from the wills of their people. How can this be changed?

Perhaps more accurate: some nations are drifting away from democracy. In particular the US can't really be considered a full democracy anymore, and the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) which publishes a "democracy index" every year, has recently downgraded the US to "flawed democracy".

I think that this could happen in the US shows that democracy as currently implemented in most countries still has significant design flaws. We need a democracy 2.0 that's more stable, less easily corrupted, and helps educate the people so that their "will" is more rational. Personally I still believe that democracy is the only civilized option, or rather some manifestation of the principles of the "Open Society" as described by Karl Popper is the only option. But an Open Society is an iterative process which needs continuous improvement by definition.

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#128

Post by b112 »

el_don_almighty wrote: post #109
schaefer wrote: post #102

I've read the bill of rights. i have a right to be secure in my papers and affects. okay, this bill emphasizes that police need a warrant, but glosses over the bit about actual security . administrative controls aren't security. That's why we haven't outlawed locks on the front door...

lockpickinglawyer on youtube should quickly dispel any sense of security you have with the lock on your house. It is literally ZERO

Entering an unlocked house, in many common law jurisdictions, is tresspass at best.

Picking a lock falls into break and enter, regardless of the name of the charge.

Windows, and even walls offer little security in modern houses too! I can literally punch my way through vinyl siding, with chipboard under that, through to drywall.

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#129

Post by Spooky23 »

ngold wrote: post #45
pensatoio wrote: post #17

These bills terrify me. A lot of stuff happens in politics that’s frustrating, and much of it doesn’t catch my attention. There’s something about the pure ignorance that goes into breaking encryption that I can’t comprehend. I can understand when bills come through and the extreme differences in opinion are the result of different interpretations of facts and truth, but when it comes to encryption, there is no safe p…

It's very simple. The powers that be just want to break encryption, but only for law enforcement use. Simple. Uggg.

It’s not that simple. They want certain concessions from tech companies and others.

Ie “It would be a shame if something were to happen to your business model here.”

Re: An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

#130

Post by schaefer »

el_don_almighty wrote: post #109
schaefer wrote: post #102

I've read the bill of rights. i have a right to be secure in my papers and affects. okay, this bill emphasizes that police need a warrant, but glosses over the bit about actual security . administrative controls aren't security. That's why we haven't outlawed locks on the front door...

lockpickinglawyer on youtube should quickly dispel any sense of security you have with the lock on your house. It is literally ZERO

you are suggesting that commercially available and mass produced locks are easily defeatable. I agree. but that was not my point at all.

you see, I am legally allowed to blow my life's savings installing a lock that is secure - if I so choose. and if I do, I'm not legally required to resister the key with the police department... just in case they need to serve a warrant later on. nor are lock manufactures required to make the key available to police for each lock they sell.

Post reply on HN