Live data from Hacker News

An even worse anti-encryption bill than EARN IT

cyberlaw.stanford.edu

201–210 of 367 posts

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

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For that time in history, it could be argued that the decision made sense. Japanese subs did shell the US mainland, and Japanese-Americans in Hawaii did help a Japanese aircrew try to escape after Pearl Harbor. Japan planned to return to Hawaii after Midway to occupy Hawaii. It could also be argued that it made sense to do the same for Germans since we had a minority of Germans siding with Hitler and even holding Na…

I believe that US citizens of German descent were actually placed in internment camps during WW2. I don't think it was at the same scale as Japanese citizens but it did happen.

A very small number did, relative to their portion of the population (which was large.)

Anti-German sentiment was certainly present in America and the UK during the world wars. In response to Anti-German sentiment, the British royal family anglicized their name during WWI, changing it from House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to House of Windsor. In America, German Americans largely stopped speaking German in public (German was the second most common language in America and was spoken particularly often in Pennsylvania, remnants of which can still be seen today in "Pennsylvanian Dutch" culture.) However, treating German Americans as severely as Japanese Americans were treated, at least on the mainland, was probably too impractical to be considered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Americans#The_apparent_...

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

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> used nuclear bombs in anger Using a new weapon to end an existing war is one thing. Using a new weapon to start new wars is another. That delineation is independent of one's judgement of the weapon per se . They're both bad. But one is worse than the other. The U.S. had the opportunity to go on a mission of global military conquest. There was military support for nuclear war with Russia and China. The United States…

Would you apply the same reasoning to any other country that used nukes to "end an existing war"?

> Would you apply the same reasoning to any other country that used nukes to "end an existing war"?

Yes, using nukes defensively is less bad than using it to start a war. That doesn’t mean I support the use of nukes.

WWII was unique in starting with no nukes and ending with them. We also didn't yet understand the long-term ramifications of the weapon's use.

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

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 un…

WW1 was a total war. Fascism was a response to total war which conscripted every civilian into the military. Italy did not have an army of 500,000 soliders before WW1, no country did. The british empire's armed force was 80,000 -- and was one of the largest in the world. Where do you think 500,000 "soliders" came from? They were drafted from the population. It's literally in the first paragraph in the wikipedia artic…

> WW1 was a total war. Fascism was a response to total war which conscripted every civilian into the military.

WWI was a contributing factor to the rise of fascism, which is a complex phenomenon whose roots date back at least to the late 1800s with the rise of nationalism throughout Europe, the unification of Germany, the growing distrust of liberal democracies at the turn of the century, etc. It was not a "direct result" of WWI.

> Italy did not have an army of 500,000 soliders before WW1, no country did. The british empire's armed force was 80,000 -- and was one of the largest in the world. Where do you think 500,000 "soliders" came from? They were drafted from the population.

WWI was unparalleled in magnitude with respect to previous wars, but, as far as Italy is concerned, it did not involve directly the vast majority of the civilian population (around 34M at the time), which was never in a war zone or at risk of atrocities from the opposing force. The fighting was confined to the northeastern Alpine regions of Trentino, Veneto and Friuli. The Austrians made a small advance into the Italian territory before being decisively defeated on the Piave river. The industrial and agricultural heartlands of the country were largely intact at the end of the war, no major urban centres were captured or destroyed, and important land gains were made in the form of new territories formerly under Austrian control.

WWI was hell on Earth in the trenches, but no, Italy was not in disarray and did not experience mass death or poverty as a result of WWI.

(There were of course serious economic issues in the interwar period, but their genesis is in the great depression, not WWI)

> I'm British and I know my own history very well. Read any book of the time, "Road to Wigan Peer" will give you the quality of poverty.

Life has been shit for most people for millenia, in Europe and elsewhere. But just take a look at any graph of the life expectancy over time in Europe and you will see that is has been steadily improving throughout the 20th century (with a couple of big temporary down spikes for the flu and WW2 - not WW1).

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

#204
post #94

The solution to policies like this is serverless or point-to-point systems. As an application publisher you cannot be held liable or obligated towards that which you do not possess and are, by design, not capable of possessing. As an example consider copyright law and BitTorrent. BitTorrent provides a software application and protocol but not servers or services, so the BitTorrent software is never liable for the cop…

The solution is to vote out idiots who support things like this, and get the government actually working for its citizens again, not against it. That's hard, and feels damn near impossible sometimes, but it's required. You can't fix social problems with clever technological workarounds.

Voting has gotten us to a point where half the politicians want to spread a plague, and much of the population believes them. That shouldn't even be a political issue!! Encryption is far far down the list of what is possible to meaningfully express in this system.

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

#205

> (R-SC)...(R-AR)...(R-TN) It's funny how you can read just that and know that the bill is going to be absurdly bad. Not even just bad in the philosophical/political sense but actually just bad as in not understanding the problem space, or not even formulated clearly or coherently.

Toss enough coins and you'll get a good streak of heads going. There's plenty of D's who just love to come up with bills that make citizens more vulnerable to the government.

Sorry to say, but even in Australia the combination of SC, AR, TN leaves me worrying. There's a lot of dark history associated with those states that the world has known about for years. That's without taking the "R" into account.

Sometimes I think the USA should have it's own history A/B compared against it's own history as recorded by the rest of the world.

Not saying it's Tiananmen level yet, but it seems some people haven't read their own history.

Disclaimer: I live in NSW, Australia. Some evil stuff happened here that is rarely acknowledged.

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

#207
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think ironically a bill like this passing would lead to more decentralization of services -- making their goals of monitoring information even harder.

They don't want to track people who will use those decentralized services. Simple as that. They want control over majority. Nothing else. Any legal business will be required to do what law requires them and it will affect every citizen. I have no hope given the stupidity of my country to do something against acts like [1] personal data protection law or the decryption act. US going towards that road only means it's e…

Nailed this. This is about controlling the 99% of folks who aren't going to take the extra step of using a decentralized service. Think about how hard it is to get friends and family members on board with something super easy to use like Signal. Open source decentralized services are DOA for the overwhelming majority of people.

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

#208

Computer criminals (especially the commercial variety) and foreign intelligence agents must be drooling right about now. If something like this becomes law, it's only a matter of time until a mass-breach gives, e.g., China or Russia the dirty laundry of thousands of politicians and business leaders in one fell swoop. I don't think I need to spell out what that would mean for what's left of democracy in the USA. I'm c…

but why do you think that 3 letters such as the FBI, DEA, or the NSA or CIA will stop using strong encryption? do you really think that the DHS will just break its own encryption because of some laws?

They won't stop using strong encryption. The big national security issue is not a break of government encryption; it's a break on civilian encryption.

Consider a foreign adversary with the ability to break encryption used by banks, credit card companies, large retail facilities, hospitals, etc.

There are a few things that seem tempting-- think "steal from the banks", but a lot of that is unlikely to work, anyway. Banks and wire transfer systems have auditing and verification measures in place that would make it difficult to pull this off successfully. Credit card companies and retailers would have a serious issue with reissuing cards, etc.

What would turn things upside-down is the LOSS OF FAITH in these systems and the economic, social, and practical effects. The Russians would be all to happy to exploit this.

Suppose somebody recovers the necessary keys to send out fake-but-authenticated buy/sell orders on the NYSE, NASDAQ, or even commodities exchanges, with the specific intent of causing havoc with algorithmic trading, and causes a crash.

Suppose somebody is able to break into JP Morgan Chase and reveal private records, transfer information, and the session keys used to decrypt them.

Suppose somebody is able to modify a single prescription in West Bumfuck, Georgia, cause their death, and show off that they can do it again.

In all of these cases, you would see an immediate collapse of trust in important institutions. If the attackers make clear that their ability to fuck things up is the result of backdoored crypto, there would likely be spillover from one institution to the others-- "I can't even trust my pharmacy; how the hell can I trust my bank?!"

That collapse of trust would result in severe, immediate, and possibly unrecoverable damage to entire industries. That would likely destroy a lot of wealth as stocks take a giant shit.

Could somebody DO that? With backdoored cryptio, I'd say it's likely, even inevitable. Backdoored crypto either has to have a mathematical weakness inserted somewhere into the algorithm itself (in which case I would expect adversarial equivalents of the NSA to hire fucktons of mathematicians and tell them find and exploit said backdoor), or you have to do some form of key escrow (in which case the master keys used to protect session keys will be SUPER high priority for attack, including technical attacks and the famous "give the right disgruntled IT worker a bunch of money" attack).

Strong, un-tampered-with encryption is SERIOUSLY vital for national security.

Yes, some companies already have issues with this due to shit security practice, but those can be treated as isolated incidents. If it becomes clear that EVERYBODY is fucked, I would expect to see the market crash worse than it has during the pandemic.

EARN-IT is NOT OKAY by a long shot, but as others have pointed out, this is an attempt to make EARN-IT look like a responsible, reasonable compromise. It isn't a reasonable compromise, but Congress is basically a giant bag of assholes, s we're probably screwed.

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

#209
post #167
post #153

As someone who typically votes conservative, this is the kind of ignorance that makes me seriously reconsider my stances. This would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and go a long way toward emulating China. No thank you! Time to double down on encryption efforts and Tor usage.

There is plenty of room for a sane, intelligent conservative position in our political landscape and discourse. Where is it? There are over a dozen congressional candidates today (all on the R side AFAIK) who espouse or at least dog whistle to the Qanon cult . Imagine if PETA, Earth First!, and the most unreasonable histrionic "social justice warrior" types took over the Democratic Party. That's where the Republican…

[deleted]

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

#210
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to vote out idiots who support things like this, and get the government actually working for its citizens again, not against it. That's hard, and feels damn near impossible sometimes, but it's required. You can't fix social problems with clever technological workarounds.

But clever technological workarounds might expose those idiots for what they are: Clowns trying to "regulate" things they don't understand without seeking expert advices beyond their narrow lobbyists.

The most "exposing" you will be able to do is to get them pushing insane laws that criminalize coherent action.

AFAIK, that's done already. You won't move further by technical decisions.

Post reply on HN