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

151–160 of 219 posts

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

#151

Post by TeMPOraL »

ctchocula wrote: post #142
KallDrexx wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Members of our government are so indoctrinated about stopping "terrorism" that they have lost all sense of perspective. Terrorism is a political word to describe political enemies of the state, yet the patriot act and surveillance machinery has been used in enforcement of many other kinds of (less serious) crime. You are looking at the problem wrong. It has nothing to do with government indoctrination but an issue…

I was with you until "It can (and will) be used against them at election time and their checks and balances (us as voters) fall for it all the time because we (as a collective whole) are short sighted and scared that something might happen and don't want to be someone who voted for someone soft on security." Everyone's vote is secret, so no one will come to your house and bust your balls over voting for someone who c…

Individual voters are influenced by media. Publishers look hard for any story they can spin into public outrage; it's natural for politicians not to want to be a hero of such story, because it will cost them votes.

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

#152

Post by mercer »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #129
twoodfin wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It would be ironic if at some point he was wiretapped and blackmailed into toeing the party line (where 'the party line' is 'they', and 'them', clearly).

On a more serious note though: it strikes me that in our time of 'total information awareness' the ability to blackmail people in powerful positions is a significant flaw in our system, much more so compared to the past.

Has any research been or anything worthwhile been written about this (potential) problem? I mean, we know people have been blackmailed or that attempts have been made, so the question is how common this actually is.

Despite my internal knee-jerk 'this sounds tinfoil-hatty', I can't think of anything keeping intelligence agencies from wielding massive hidden power in this way. Or would it just have come to light much more often if that were the case?

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

#153

Post by TeMPOraL »

aub3bhat wrote: post #148
boomboomsubban wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the underlying process that generates those numbers are widely different. So stop the underlying process? Terrorist organizations aren't quiet about their problems, that tragic day in September was in opposition to US interference in their lives. If our goal was combatting terrorism, we picked a terrible way of addressing the problem.

>>that tragic day in September was in opposition to US interference in their lives. To you these attacks are a valid grievance redressal mechanisms??? Is that the path every disenfranchised group should take?? If you are okay with such approach, no point in having a discussion.

It's not about whether you're ok or not with their methods. The question is, do you really, actually, want to stop terrorism, or are you just pretending, using the T-word as a political tool? The actions of not just US, but other western countries strongly suggest, that they don't actually care about stopping terrorism.

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

#154

Post by cm2187 »

C4K3 wrote: post #150
cm2187 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are threats against the US that are more than a few crazy people. The rise of Islamism is real. But the reality is that the number of casualties due to terrorism in the US is dwarfed by those of gang or drug violence, even including 9/11 (which is now more than 15y ago...). We do not hear anyone suggesting restricting civil liberties to reduce gang violence. It is kind of a curious massively asymmetrical tolera…

Terrorism can happen to anybody, that's the logic behind the asymmetry. "Regular" people see gang violence as something that can never happen to them.

I took gang violence as an example, there are many other kinds of "common violence" that could happen to anyone. The US stats below are for a single year [1] [2]. For reference, cumulative casualties in the US as a result of terrorism for 2001-2014 is 3,412 [3], 416 if you exclude 9/11. Any way you look at it, terrorism is a very minor form of crime in the US and Europe.

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-...

[2] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-...

[3] http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/03/us/terrorism-gun-violence/

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

#155

Post by cryptarch »

miles wrote: post #125
gumby wrote: post #63

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. 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 ht…

I first got the impression you meant something like "the Red Menace", but I take it you meant:

Engineered paranoia is still very real and a danger to our societies because of its reality-distorting effects that can result in violent overreactions.

Did I get that right?

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

#156

Post by Corrado »

bogositosius wrote: post #130
dntrkv wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I thought it was interesting that he talked about breaking into other people's devices while specifying how they would harden their own systems. "We don't want you looking at our stuff, but your stuff is fair game."

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

#157

Post by cryptarch »

grandalf wrote: post #64
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…

> We should try to think of some concrete steps to resist this. It feels like we have to try, since there's so much at stake. Great point. One idea I had recently is to start an organization in the same spirit as Open AI called OpenSurveillance that builds and releases all sorts of useful tools for thwarting surveillance efforts or acting as an adversary to an entity with pervasive surveillance power (generally speak…

Do you think such an organization could exist in the light?

I've been considering a comparable project, but more focussed on opsec/infosec in a file sharing context. However, I've felt chilled by the possible legal consequences to me and my family if I enter this arena.

Bootstrapping myself to have great opsec seems like a really tough task. I feel like I'd have to repeatedly burn hardware, houses and identities if I want to stand a chance to reach "opsec heaven" where I can freely persue projects such as the Spook's Cookbook or the Pirate's Cookbook.

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

#158

Post by Corrado »

adrr wrote: post #13

Putting in backdoors is sure fire way to kill US based mobile phone producers. Criminals will just use foreign produced phones and only way to counteract that is to outlaw those phones. Can't wait till they criminalize having certain firmware on your phones.

I had a slightly different take on the issue. If you require U.S. companies to include backdoors (or whatever word the FBI comes up with) then those companies will simply move operations to another country. Silicon Valley will dry up and innovation will happen somewhere else. You can already see the seeds of such a movement; when researchers are afraid to present at a conference for fear of being arrested[0], or a company is being forced to do something it doesn't want to do[1].

These things are not conducive to a growing, free nation. Our current leadership talks about bringing jobs back to America, but this course of action is forcing companies to move elsewhere, and taking their jobs with them.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Elcom_Ltd. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_d...

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

#159

Post by hyperdunc »

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?

Because a lightning bolt is a much more random occurance. It doesn't have agency, an agenda or a trajectory within society. A lightning bolt isn't looking to instigate more lightning bolts.

In 10 years time the death stats for lightning bolts will be similar and for road accidents will probably have declined. Which way do you think the terrorists stats will go?

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

#160

Post by ComodoHacker »

grandalf wrote: post #64
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…

> We should try to think of some concrete steps to resist this. It feels like we have to try, since there's so much at stake. Great point. One idea I had recently is to start an organization in the same spirit as Open AI called OpenSurveillance that builds and releases all sorts of useful tools for thwarting surveillance efforts or acting as an adversary to an entity with pervasive surveillance power (generally speak…

>acting as an adversary to an entity with pervasive surveillance power (generally speaking, corrupt regimes around the world)

>a user-friendly rootkit installer for easy installation >a program that trains a fleet of drones to follow a person all day, causes vehicle engine failure, etc.

I'm afraid corrupt regimes would be the ones who benefit the most from such tools.

Post reply on HN