Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight • Hacker News Board

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#91

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:23 AM UTC

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #69

smtddr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it works best to use something the "Average/non-tech" person will surely understand: "What if there were cameras in your house that recorded everything you did & said, but the government promised you the footage would only be reviewed in the case that they suspect you committed a crime. How would you feel about that?" I've gotten a lot of mileage from this metaphor myself. The response is usually silence while…

I might start responding with: "Oh, I think it will be a great idea. The government will see how good of a citizen I am and how much I learn on my own, and perhaps, if I'm lucky, they'll give me a job so that I can stop cooking the rats in my walls."

[deleted]

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#92

Post by elpachuco » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:24 AM UTC

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #69

smtddr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it works best to use something the "Average/non-tech" person will surely understand: "What if there were cameras in your house that recorded everything you did & said, but the government promised you the footage would only be reviewed in the case that they suspect you committed a crime. How would you feel about that?" I've gotten a lot of mileage from this metaphor myself. The response is usually silence while…

I might start responding with: "Oh, I think it will be a great idea. The government will see how good of a citizen I am and how much I learn on my own, and perhaps, if I'm lucky, they'll give me a job so that I can stop cooking the rats in my walls."

Not a counter argument at all. You've just shown that any more time on you will be wasted. There will always be types like you. Nothing to do but write you off.

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#93

Post by nyxtom » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:25 AM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #3

“If we find evidence of a terrorist plot… and despite having a phone number, despite having a social media address or email address, we can’t penetrate that, that’s a problem,” If you can penetrate that with evidence of a terrorist plot, 1) you can penetrate that without evidence of a terrorist plot, and 2) probably so can others. Both of these make us less safe.

Exactly!

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#94

Post by nsnick » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:27 AM UTC

So Obama is the least transparent president in history, cracked down the most on whistle blowers and is diametrically opposed to privacy. When will everyone admit that they voted for a charming fascist.

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#95

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:28 AM UTC

elpachuco wrote: post #92

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might start responding with: "Oh, I think it will be a great idea. The government will see how good of a citizen I am and how much I learn on my own, and perhaps, if I'm lucky, they'll give me a job so that I can stop cooking the rats in my walls."

Not a counter argument at all. You've just shown that any more time on you will be wasted. There will always be types like you. Nothing to do but write you off.

[deleted]

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#96

Post by snowwrestler » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:28 AM UTC

tuna-piano wrote: post #19

My biggest issue with all this is that when you give them the power to take away rights to prevent terrorism or protect children, the government will use their powers wherever convenient. For example, the patriot act has been used in 1,618 drug cases and only 15 terrorism cases[1]. It has also been used for everything from copyright violations to Las Vegas money issues[2]. 1. (2011) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blog…

That argument probably has limited utility among the general public because a lot of people think drug dealers are fair game for "any means necessary" too.

As I recall, the strongest argument in the late 1990s was that there was no possible way to design a weakness in crypto for government that bad guys couldn't also exploit--and at much greater scale. "This bill will make it easier for someone to steal your identity" type stuff.

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#97

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:33 AM UTC

diminoten wrote: post #84

Well what he actually said was that if the US government has a warrant, they shouldn't be stopped by encryption. And if the company is a US company, who would disagree with that?

[deleted]

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#98

Post by datashovel » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 4:59 AM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #78

datashovel wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

with regard to snuffing out terrorist plots, this (in my mind) needs to be a collective effort. Government is not the only entity that should be responsible for preventing terrorism. The way I see it, it's the only way to keep governments from becoming the omniscient creatures they strive to be. By making it a world-wide collective effort to work to prevent terrorism. The moment you make it entirely the government's…

Similar for abuse of anonymity, I think.

I think I understand, and agree. Government should strive to be inclusive in their objectives, and not exclusive. It creates an entirely different landscape when government is dependent upon the people and vice-versa.

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#99

Post by yummyfajitas » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 5:01 AM UTC

spiralpolitik wrote: post #87

So its Crypto Wars 2. There are two possible ways this will play out: a) Obama is just being polite given that "Call me Dave" is in town and has an election to fight so he can't been seen as being soft on terrorism. He knows that its highly likely that Cameron will be out of a job in six months time so is just stringing him along. OR: b) The fix is in, a tame lawmaker will drop a bill that they just happened to have…

Crypto wars...Given the Republican's have never met a national security bill that they didn't like...

Have we forgotten that republicans were on the right side of crypto war 1 and the first patriot act (aka joe biden's omnibus antiterrorism act)?

(Not that I think they will be on the right side for round 2, just pointing out the inaccuracy...)

Re: Obama Sides with Cameron in Encryption Fight

#100

Post by ibejoeb » Sun, Jan 18, 2015, 5:02 AM UTC

xnull1guest wrote: post #81

ibejoeb wrote: post #79

"If we find evidence of a terrorist plot…" Have I missed something important? Is there a case, or even evidence of one, wherein encryption was a factor in a plot coming to fruition? If there had been, I would have expected the Obama, Cameron, et al., to trot it out. Are we legislating this just in case? Strong encryption is already out there. I suppose if we make it illegal, the terrorists will just have to make do w…

It is not about terrorism - it is that technology like this threatens the current level of the capability of the state to enforce its laws. Imagine instead the use of encryption among the financial elite to conspire to defraud speculation markets or manipulate stock prices. Or enemy states using encryption to thwart espionage attempts. Or insurgents and soldiers engaged with US troops around the world to organize eff…

If it's not about terrorism, somebody should tell Obama; that's his quote I pulled.

Now, regarding:

> the use of encryption among the financial elite to conspire to defraud speculation markets or manipulate stock prices

Is anyone going to attempt to argue that encryption facilitates more fraud than it prevents?

> When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption.

Right. I find it hard to believe that Obama and Cameron are going to take away our encryption and somehow convince our adversaries to abide by those rules.