FBI director Comey backs new Feinstein push for decrypt bill • Hacker News Board

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

#81

Post by jrs95 » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:42 AM UTC

guntars wrote: post #42

jrs95 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's assuming voters are rational actors which is clearly not the case

I love how it's always the "other" voters that are irrational and voting against their best interests, never the observer.

I didn't intend for this to be a 100% thing, I think there are a decent number of people who are probably a lot more well informed than I am, but when the large majority of voters opinions are so easily manipulated as to effectively be for sale, then what the hell is the point? It's not much different than an oligarchy, but it's made a bit better because our overlords have a lot of hoops to jump through the keep the show running.

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

#82

Post by aub3bhat » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:44 AM UTC

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…

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.

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

#83

Post by arwhatever » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:44 AM UTC

bingomad123 wrote: post #78

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 symptom of the kind of cowardly, authority-respecting society we've become. I am an Indian citizen living in USA and I think American society must take the blame here and not the politicians. The way society thinks and votes I think only a total narcissist moron can succeed in US administration. The fastest way to rise to top (as we saw in case of Obama and Trump) is to find some target group and blame t…

I'm always requesting constructive criticism like this from foreign-born coworkers, hoping for such valuable outside perspective, but they seldom provide it, no doubt hoping to avoid being offensive.

This is a really excellent point that you make.

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

#84

Post by rietta » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:48 AM UTC

I was watching the hearing during lunch, had to attend to work meetings, and then saw this article which is what spurred me to post my open letter to Congress tonight and share it here on HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14261423. We have to get this information out there in a format that Congress and our non-techie friends and family understand.

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

#85

Post by rietta » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:50 AM UTC

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?

As I just put it in my open letter: "Let me be clear. This distinction that the Director makes has no basis in fact or science. Any imaginable key escrow system that would by design provide routine access to encrypted data is a backdoor that will be able to be hacked. Any such system of so called lawful intercept is an unfixable, mandated security vulnerability that will make Americans less safe both at home and abroad." (https://rietta.com/blog/2017/05/03/americans-access-to-stron...)

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

#86

Post by Rapzid » Thu, May 04, 2017, 12:53 AM UTC

mgleason_3 wrote: post #65

Unbelievable. Just happened to see a clip today ( https://goo.gl/F9XeQU ) where Feinstein was "grilling" Comey about announcing the investigation into Clinton right before the election. When Feinstein totally let him off the hook I was floored?!? He interfered worse than the Russians - how does he still have a job? Ahh, she wants his support for the decrypt bill. I'll never understand why the Democrats have zero inte…

Do you mean the politicians or the people who would vote for Democrats?

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

#87

Post by mahyarm » Thu, May 04, 2017, 1:03 AM UTC

jjawssd wrote: post #34

Why do California Democrats vote this person in year after year?

Because they vote for their party, and california is a blue party state.

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

#88

Post by lern_too_spel » Thu, May 04, 2017, 1:04 AM UTC

abritinthebay wrote: post #69

cracell wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the thinking is "Anyone can use backdoors so they are bad but we have to have access to everything. So give us access without a backdoor." I suppose tech companies could give them a backdoor and call it a front door?

> I suppose tech companies could give them a backdoor and call it a front door? They're more likely to go "LOL, no" and as it's both impossible AND compelling speech is impossible per 1st Amendment the Government would end up losing in the courts.

The compelling speech argument would not have held up in court. Apple was putting on a show because they had already advertised to customers that they wouldn't unlock phones for law enforcement.

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

#89

Post by ghughes » Thu, May 04, 2017, 1:04 AM UTC

rietta wrote: post #85

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?

As I just put it in my open letter: "Let me be clear. This distinction that the Director makes has no basis in fact or science. Any imaginable key escrow system that would by design provide routine access to encrypted data is a backdoor that will be able to be hacked. Any such system of so called lawful intercept is an unfixable, mandated security vulnerability that will make Americans less safe both at home and abro…

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

#90

Post by panzer_wyrm » Thu, May 04, 2017, 1:11 AM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #76

I still don't understand. They want to be able to have a court order a device maker to decrypt data, but today they can already get a court to order the device owner to decrypt it. The device owner actually has the password or key. The truth is that they want to do this without the device owner knowing it's being done.

Passwords so far are somewhat protected under the fifth. And you have to go trough contempt of court. Firmware signing keys that belong to a third party are not.