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

FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 219 posts

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#121

Post by Programmatic »

1457389 wrote: post #66
arglebarnacle wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in useful information Right, he wouldn't use it because he doesn't believe it's effective. The GP is suggesting that if it were effective and legal, do you really believe he would refrain from doing it on moral grounds? It's the prerogative of the FBI to pursue cases using essentially all effective legal means, and it's no surprise to hear they are lobbying fo…

No. Like I said, he literally stated word for word that torture is both morally wrong in his eyes and ineffective, not to mention illegal. Paraphrasing here but I think his definition was along the lines of "anything that purposefully causes physical harm or injury to a person", and when asked whether bad prison food counts, he said that in his eyes for his team that is not something he would condone. This was a pret…

Not to take away from his talking the good talk, but I don't think that his moral position is very meaningful given that it is demonstrably ineffective. If it was demonstrably effective and he said it was immoral, those words would carry much more weight. But he has little to lose by saying that it's morally wrong when it doesn't work. The illegality is also moot when discussing legalization.

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#122

Post by ponyfleisch »

grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

> Nobody would reasonably argue that extreme surveillance measures, patriot act, etc., is necessary to stop the vast majority of crimes from occurring, so why is it so easy for seemingly serious/intelligent people to think this nonsense is reasonable?

This depends on what kind of crime you talk about. And is "the vast majority of crimes" actually prevented from occurring? How do you get numbers for this?

Calling people who don't agree with you stupid is not going to advance your cause. At all.

> I am surprised anyone can still use the word "terrorism" with a straight face anymore after it's become so clear that there is no large existential threat (merely the occasional zealot who acts out due to his/her own mental health issues).

Two points:

1. The occasional zealot is all it takes to make people feel unsafe, affect their behaviour towards other people and just generally ruin a lot of peoples days.

2. Blaming all terrorist attacks on mental issues alone without taking into account viral ideologies is dishonest.

edit: i forgot this:

> And in spite of a historically unprecedented global surveillance system there have been no attacks thwarted.

Provably wrong.

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#123

Post by twoodfin »

grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

Doesn't anyone remember why President Obama appointed a Republican FBI Director in the first place?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05...

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#124

Post by jliptzin »

Spooky23 wrote: post #113
grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

Comey is a bureaucrat looking for more power to do his job. He's the runny nose. The flu is Feinstein. From the ridiculous controls that treat cold medicine like contraband, the Patriot act, and bullshit like this, the Senator is a wellspring of bad law and disrespect for the American people. Why do Californians keep electing this person?

Good question. Maybe because she reminds people of their grandmas?

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#125

Post by miles »

gumby wrote: post #63
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Members of our government are so indoctrinated about stopping "terrorism" that they have lost all sense of perspective. In this case, it might be better to assume malice rather than incompetence. In the 1950's it was s/terrorist/communist/, but it was a remarkably effective political tool. We might be in the same situation. But this time, our fates are all linked. Once shipping backdoors becomes mainstream, it might…

> Members of our government are so indoctrinated about stopping "terrorism" that they have lost all sense of perspective. > In this case, it might be better to assume malice rather than incompetence. I really want to consider you paranoid, but sadly I strongly agree. This is hardly the first time engineered paranoia has gripped the country, but living through it is horrible. I was a kid during the mid-to-late Cold Wa…

This is hardly the first time engineered paranoia has gripped the country ... I was a kid during the mid-to-late Cold War (post "duck and cover") and somehow I was never able to take it seriously.

Unfortunately, the threat was (and still very much is) real:

Stanislav Petrov: The man who may have saved the world http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24280831

Thank you Vasili Arkhipov, the man who stopped nuclear war https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/27/vasili...

Not that paranoia is a particularly useful response, but it did not require much engineering.

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#126

Post by dntrkv »

grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

The article specifically states that he doesn't want a backdoor:

“We’ve had very good open and productive conversations with the private sector over the last 18 months about this issue, because everybody realizes we care about the same things. We all love privacy, we all care about public safety and none of us want backdoors — we don’t want access to devices built in in some way. What we want to work with the manufacturers on is to figure out how can we accommodate both interests in a sensible way”

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#127

Post by jliptzin »

aswanson wrote: post #103
aub3bhat wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please whatever your opinion might be saying """ surprised anyone can still use the word "terrorism" with a straight face anymore """ Is quickest way to shut down conversation. Especially given horrific events in France, Ohio, Florida. Your argument is not only ridiculous its counter productive to anyone offering a balanced saner approach.

You're more likely to die from a lightning bolt than a 'terrorist' attack. You're thousands of times more likely to die from bad driving habits or being overweight, so why is the terrorist bogeyman given so much concern in the political conversation?

First of all I agree with you, but let me state what I think the other side's argument might be. You can choose to eat healthy and exercise and reduce your chance of early death from obesity/health issues. You can also drive extra carefully, or take a plane, or not travel at all if you're that concerned about a car crash. With a terrorist attack though, it's mostly out of your control and literally anyone can be affected at any time and that's the scary part. That being said, people should take into account how minuscule that risk really is, but that's hard for the average joe to do when every attack is plastered all over the news for days whether it's something major or a lone gunman killing a few people.

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#128

Post by pdkl95 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #14
dhfhduk wrote: post #10

I'm confused about this. I'm hurried at the moment, but this seems to a bill that orders tech companies to provide a solution to encryption without having a backdoor? Isn't this like legislating a violation of mathematics or something?

Yes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPBH1eW28mo is a pretty good video for persuading people why this legislation is a bad idea. We might still be able to beat it by rallying support.

Susan Landau's congressional testimony - with Comey siting one table away - applies to this as well. She explains in detail not only the problem with backdoors, but also how the FBI badly needs to update their methods. The quote from the NSA that legal access doesn't mean that access will be easy should have ended this brouhaha last year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1GgnbN9oNw&t=3h35m50s

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#129

Post by throwaway13337 »

twoodfin wrote: post #123
grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

Doesn't anyone remember why President Obama appointed a Republican FBI Director in the first place? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05...

That was a very interesting read.

The gist of it is that Comey went to great lengths to make sure warrantless wiretapping wouldn't be considered legal. And when he failed to do so, he resigned.

What happened to him since then?

Re: FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill

#130

Post by bogositosius »

dntrkv wrote: post #126
grandalf wrote: post #30

From his perspective as the head of the FBI whose job it is to achieve outcomes within the law, of course Comey advocates encryption backdoors. He would likely also advocate allowing the FBI to suspend the bill of rights for any suspect during the duration of an investigation, and he'd quite likely prefer that the FBI be legally allowed to torture suspects if extreme techniques were viewed as likely to result in usef…

The article specifically states that he doesn't want a backdoor: “We’ve had very good open and productive conversations with the private sector over the last 18 months about this issue, because everybody realizes we care about the same things. We all love privacy, we all care about public safety and none of us want backdoors — we don’t want access to devices built in in some way. What we want to work with the manufac…

He says he doesn't want a backdoor and then spends all his time asking for one.
Post reply on HN