51–60 of 230 posts
It seems inevitable that it would help that given nation's "enemies" more than that given nation. Their "enemies" will get a hold of them, and they can make use of them however they want free of restrictions unlike the given nation.
I don't see anyway around that problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I can just refuse to decrypt my data. They can just break physical locks.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
What number am I thinking of?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Refusing to decrypt is itself a crime (contempt of court?), so the government can jail you for years that way. Edit: this doesn’t help in cases like terrorism where the owner of the device has already been killed of course.
I am not sure you can be compelled to remember something you forgot. And nobody can tell you if you remember or not, or if you will ever remember again. So no, some judge may try to hold you in contempt of court, and it may work for a while, but at some point -- if you have a good lawyer it will turn in to a civil rights issue. Also, you could plead the 5th as well. NOTE: I am not a lawyer, and these are just my opin…
Judges can certainly hold you in court indefinitely on a contempt of court charge as well. Considering the nature of the charges that this typically comes up in (see Francis Rawls) I wouldn't count on trying to make it a civil rights issue doing much in your favor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I can just refuse to decrypt my data. They can just break physical locks.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
People have been hiding information and assets via buried treasure for millennia, with the key (location) only accessible in the brain of the one burying it.
Is it easier now? Sure. But there've always been physical analogues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I can just refuse to decrypt my data. They can just break physical locks.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
Except it’s not a discussion worth having. If you have a back door, it’s there for everybody not just the people it’s intended for. Additionally, there’s not going to be a way to force people to use the encryption that happens to have a backdoor. It’s an algorithm. People who don’t obey the rules will just use a more secure method when they need to protect something. This is why there’s no point to having the convers…
Also focusing on enforcement is making the perfect the enemy of the good. What percentage of communication in this country flows through either Apple, Google, Facebook, or Amazon? A solution that works for those 4 companies would be a huge step even if it wouldn't result in 100% coverage.
And just to be clear, I don't think the answer is necessarily backdoors in encryption. But I recognize that there is a problem and that we should be open to talk about ways to fix that problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I can just refuse to decrypt my data. They can just break physical locks.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
Software update systems have been successfully exploited to deliver malware:
> On a normal day, these servers push out routine updates—bug fixes, security patches, new features—to a piece of accounting software called M.E.Doc, which is more or less Ukraine’s equivalent of TurboTax or Quicken. It’s used by nearly anyone who files taxes or does business in the country. But for a moment in 2017, those machines served as ground zero for the most devastating cyberattack since the invention of the internet—an attack that began, at least, as an assault on one nation by another.
https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-cyberattack-ukraine-rus...
Presumably the software update systems for major operating systems, like for Android or iOS, are typically more heavily secured than M.E.Doc.
But they are also targets of limited value. To insert malware into iOS, you would need not only access to their software update system, you would need access to (and understanding of) their source code and build system, and access to their code signing key.
And even then, it's not clear that these software update systems are even capable of targeting patches down to the level of the phone of an individual person. There's no reason for it now. The central system really just needs to make the update available in its various OS flavors, and each client can request what it needs.
If we force these OS companies to create a targeted backdoor system, all the hard work will be done for the bad guys. They need only achieve access to the special "law enforcement access" system, they will have everything they need all ready to go.
Under these conditions, could Google or Apple keep out the bad guys with 100% success? I have great respect for these teams, but those are very long odds.
It's far safer, for them and for us, to just not build that functionality. This was the point that Apple so forcefully made when Jim Comey came after them to decrypt the San Bernadino iPhone.
EDIT to add: these companies operate in more than just the U.S. If they build a targeted backdoor system, you don't think other countries will demand access to that system as well? Look: Apple already compromised on iCloud hosting to maintain access to the Chinese market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I can just refuse to decrypt my data. They can just break physical locks.
This is what a lot of people in our community seemingly refuse to recognize. For all intents and purposes, encryption is a unbreakable lock that can serve to perfectly hide valuable criminal evidence. Such a thing wasn't possible when our laws were written and has never before been possible in the physical world. Its existence has potential to be a huge shift in how we enforce the law. Regardless of our views on encr…
Also, the importance of being able to get away with crime should not be overlooked. It wasn't that long ago that being gay was illegal. And ICE is operating concentration camps this very second.