FBI Director: Ban Encryption to Counter Domestic Extremism

[Cameramonkey]

Ive got a former coworker that works for a defense contractor.

This guy is a straight shooter and not the type to hype or tell stories. But he did tell me one interesting tidbit. "If you think .gov can't break standard internet encryption, you're wrong. We can see more than you think. " When asked to elaborate he gave me a wry smile and said "That's all I can say. Take it or leave it. You'd just be surprised."

 

[actaeon277]

Ive got a former coworker that works for a defense contractor.

This guy is a straight shooter and not the type to hype or tell stories. But he did tell me one interesting tidbit. "If you think .gov can't break standard internet encryption, you're wrong. We can see more than you think. " When asked to elaborate he gave me a wry smile and said "That's all I can say. Take it or leave it. You'd just be surprised."

Then he just made the case against "backdoors"

 

[actaeon277]

There is always going to be a fight between codemakers, and codebreakers.

It has existed throughout human history.

Yet NOW then need a change.
Why?
We never had criminals or enemies before?

 

[jsx1043]

You know what has a proven track record? Old-school tradecraft. Go analog.

Hint: Also why lockdowns close bars, restaurants and public spaces...

 

[Tombs]

Banning technology is a foolish endeavor. Pandora could never cram anything back in that box.

That said, the "backdoor" is not for eavesdropping. That's a different issue. It's for things like a warrant is granted for the data on X device, but X device is encrypted and the warrant is effectively useless at getting the data. What the feds wanted was for someone like Apple to have the equivalent of an override code so that, when presented with a warrant for X device, they could be compelled to provide the override code for that device.

The downside is if a backdoor exists, bad actors will also get it, and given Apple's reliance on China it's pretty obvious they would gain access to it. Then it just becomes a matter of resources to decrypt anything.

The bad actors are the feds.

I don't think chinese soldiers will show up at my house because I said something bad about Xi.
But feds will certainly show up if I say certain things about the potato in the white house.

We already have our top general giving classified intel to china, why would average people being eavesdropped on even compare?

 

[Tombs]

Ive got a former coworker that works for a defense contractor.

This guy is a straight shooter and not the type to hype or tell stories. But he did tell me one interesting tidbit. "If you think .gov can't break standard internet encryption, you're wrong. We can see more than you think. " When asked to elaborate he gave me a wry smile and said "That's all I can say. Take it or leave it. You'd just be surprised."

Because NIST creates the base algorithms used for almost all encryption.

 

[Tombs]

Like I said, that's a different issue. Related, but different. Any tool can be misused, however if the tool doesn't exist it can not be used when appropriate, either.

It's never appropriate.

 

[KLB]

Like I said, that's a different issue. Related, but different. Any tool can be misused, however if the tool doesn't exist it can not be used when appropriate, either.

I can understand the concerns on both sides. That said, I think the hyperbole is getting a bit thick in the thread. It's INGO so it has to be treason, socialism, or liberalism destroying everything but as a quick reminder:

“We are helping Apple all of the time on TRADE and so many other issues, and yet they refuse to unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements they will have to step up to the plate and help our great Country, NOW! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” - Donald Trump

The question is, do the situations where it might be needed outweigh the situations where would be used inappropriately? For me the answer is no.

Trump was wrong too.

A backdoor either exists or it doesn't, and once it exists will be stolen or reverse engineered by any state actor with the resources to do so. The encryption/decryption arms race is pretty binary (literally and figuratively).

Another issue with this whole idea, and an even more worrisome one. The recent Apple patch is a good example of that, even though it wasn't purposefully put there.

Add that the NSA lost a bunch of their hacking tools to bad actors in the past, and I have absolutely zero trust that the government can be trusted with something like that.

 

[Cameramonkey]

It's never appropriate.

Like when Grandpa dies and you need to get into his iphone to recover pics, and possibly important info?

There COULD be legit uses for it. But no. Just no. Too many ways to be abused.

 

[BigRed]

Here is some encryption....

**** these ******** straight to****.



Might I also suggest these monkeys be kept in a box instead of instigating trouble.

 

[BigRed]

Like when Grandpa dies and you need to get into his iphone to recover pics, and possibly important info?

There COULD be legit uses for it. But no. Just no. Too many ways to be abused.

If something is that important, don't keep it there.

 

[Tombs]

Like when Grandpa dies and you need to get into his iphone to recover pics, and possibly important info?

There COULD be legit uses for it. But no. Just no. Too many ways to be abused.

That's the price of security. Sometimes it can be inconvenient.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

There is always going to be a fight between codemakers, and codebreakers.

It has existed throughout human history.

Yet NOW then need a change.
Why?
We never had criminals or enemies before?

Cryptography is currently winning the arms race, I suppose.

 

[manifest destiny]

Feds can already "backdoor". There is no doubt of this. The issue is Feds presenting the evidence obtained via backdoor in court and trying to explain where/ how the evidence was obtained. It's stunning really. Personal papers offered protection when in locked briefcase. Personal papers locked in phone? Sh***********t. *=i

 

[BigRed]

Feds can already "backdoor". There is no doubt of this. The issue is Feds presenting the evidence obtained via backdoor in court and trying to explain where/ how the evidence was obtained. It's stunning really. Personal papers offered protection when in locked briefcase. Personal papers locked in phone? Sh***********t. *=i

Good encryption does not provide a key along with the encryption....just sayin'

 

[actaeon277]

Cryptography is currently winning the arms race, I suppose.

For now.
But the the "winner" has constantly changed hands.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Feds can already "backdoor". There is no doubt of this. The issue is Feds presenting the evidence obtained via backdoor in court and trying to explain where/ how the evidence was obtained. It's stunning really. Personal papers offered protection when in locked briefcase. Personal papers locked in phone? Sh***********t. *=i

Yep. As per my post, there is no doubt they can already do it. Its whether they will admit on the record they can in order to obtain legal status. (warrants, present evidence in court, etc)

So currently they can do it, and can see anything they want... but in a HARD only 'off the record' context, and only for the consumption of the intelligence community internally. This push is only to dot the i's and cross the t's so they can use the evidence against us in court.

 

[BigRed]

Yep. As per my post, there is no doubt they can already do it. Its whether they will admit on the record they can in order to obtain legal status. (warrants, present evidence in court, etc)

So currently they can do it, and can see anything they want... but in a HARD only 'off the record' context, and only for the consumption of the intelligence community internally. This push is only to dot the i's and cross the t's so they can use the evidence against us in court.

Indeed.

****, they have already proven they will lie to the "secret court" called FISA.

For one to think they give a rat's *** about limitations placed upon them by the constitution, one would have to be a fool.

They are simply seeking cover.

 

[Tombs]

Cryptography is currently winning the arms race, I suppose.

Except for that time they were pressuring apple into giving them a back door, claiming they couldn't get into a phone.

Apple denied them, then once the story went silent, they got into that phone.
Almost like they're just lazy assholes who were wanting a faster and easier way to spy on every citizen.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Feds can already "backdoor". There is no doubt of this.

Indeed. They've been "backdooring" us for decades, and didn't even have the decency to use lube.