I wrote to my representatives on both political sides, and all insisted that it “won’t affect encryption.” Either I don’t understand enough about EARN-IT, or they don’t understand enough about encryption, because that doesn’t make much sense from what I’ve read.
Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
201–209 of 209 posts
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
The right to privacy, and protections against unreasonable search and seizure are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution after all!
Yes, and the government has created convenient carve outs for its self. For example in Carroll v. United States, the judicial branch surrendered its authority to authorize searches to the executive branch. For searches of your vehicle, all the police need is probable cause. The police, of course, determine if they have probable cause. So this makes the 4th amendment irrelevant in these circumstances. Throughout US hi…
> For example in Carroll v. United States, the judicial branch surrendered its authority to authorize searches to the executive branch.
The judicial branch can choose not to enforce the Constitution, contrary to its duty and purpose, but what they can't do—what no branch of the government can do without amending the Constitution—is legally authorize any agent of the government to perform a search or seize property (i.e. issue a warrant—whether they use that term or not) without "probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The text is perfectly clear and permits no exceptions or "carve outs". I doubt the intent was for the police to issue their own warrants, but even if the judiciary grants them that power they still have to fulfill the requirements.
Of course if you're just saying that what they can get away with in practice and what the Constitution actually allows are two different things, I agree. There are rights, constitutional and otherwise—and then there is power. Every time they do this, however, it undermines whatever legitimacy or respect they might have otherwise had. Any thug can steal your stuff or invade your privacy and have a chance at getting away with it. To the extent a government wants its actions to be seen as legitimate it can't afford to ignore that "piece of paper" it was founded on.
> The police, of course, determine if they have probable cause.
What counts as "probable cause" is indeed the weakest part of the 4th Amendment. At the very least, if a given "cause" does not lead to the target's conviction in a majority of cases, of a crime sufficient to justify the search, then you cannot reasonably consider it "probable". Unfortunately that can only be observed in retrospect. It would have been better to require full compensation to the victim for any search or seizure which does not lead to their conviction, ensuring that the incentives are properly aligned.
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FSF isn't the EFF. The FSF is supposed to advocate why the stupid law is an affront to user freedom and the EFF is meant to be advocating why the stupid law makes people vulnerable to criminals. The FSF has a complicated and niche advocacy position, they should stay focused. If they don't advocate software user freedom, nobody will. In this case, there are already lots of people against encryption restrictions.
Seems to me that banning encryption would thoroughly limit software freedoms. Ie:can't use anything secure, thus can't freely choose your toolset.
That is probably why the FSF has published an article with the title "EARN-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom".
But the point that the FSF needs to focus on is that EARN-IT is bad because it limits user freedom. The fact that users may choose to use that freedom to protect themselves from criminals isn't the issue. There might be an obvious and compelling reason users need freedom or there might not be. The FSF doesn't need to care and should be against the bill regardless.
Much like how the FSF doesn't care about whether the GPL is economic or not - they think software projects should all be licensed under it (or an equivalently free license). The point isn't whether freedom is good or necessary. That is taken as a priori truth. The point the FSF advocates is whether users have it.
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#204I'm not even a US/UK/EU citizen. Is there any way I can contribute? Or do I just sit and watch the world burn as policymakers elsewhere indirectly make policies that might inadvertently affect people far far away as well?
Learn cryptography, write cryptographic software, it's really important that people out of the US do so. Because if a bill like this passes we will need software without backdoors.
[deleted]
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#205The fact that this kind of idiocy even makes its way to law makers frightens me greatly (whether it passes or not). We're going to be in a world of hurt
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Without it the criminals WILL have access to your systems and data Replacing criminals and state overreach with foreign adversaries may be more salient. Our encryption debate came of age after the Cold War. The boogeymen of that era have been surpassed. We have new ones, and they're more sinister than thieves and more tangible than a your government turning on you.
On what occasion have any of these new cyberattacking boogeymen-on-steroids done anything to anyone? I'm going to continue to worry about criminal fraud and my own government, rather than ghosts with foreign names.
The sheer amount of Chinese and Russian IPs showing up in my SSH logs indicate the answer is 'plenty'.
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and the government has created convenient carve outs for its self. For example in Carroll v. United States, the judicial branch surrendered its authority to authorize searches to the executive branch. For searches of your vehicle, all the police need is probable cause. The police, of course, determine if they have probable cause. So this makes the 4th amendment irrelevant in these circumstances. Throughout US hi…
> The police, of course, determine if they have probable cause. So this makes the 4th amendment irrelevant in these circumstances. Can't you go to the court if you disagree that they had a probable cause?
If you're rich or can afford the months of devoting your life to that, yes.
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#208Throw away account (does not do much good with modern AI and ML). But here goes. I am a US citizen (never left the country) and I always vote Republican. Down-vote away! The FBI came to my house in October 2021. Two special agents (one of which I knew from prior IT Security engagements) and a 'Threat Assessment' Police Officer from the local police department. They asked me if I was an Islamic extremist/terrorist. I…
Is this you? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29399051
Re: Earn-IT threatens encryption and therefore user freedom
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is an example of a right that you think people should have (by law), which constrains the government in some way?
The right to not be randomly murdered by the government.
Why are you afraid of the government randomly killing you? I think you only have to think about that if you're doing or planning something very illegal. People who have problems with trust and are overly paranoid might fantasize about that sort of thing, but the average citizen who doesn't do anything wrong will be fine.