Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Friday April 15 2016, @12:12AM   Printer-friendly
from the retarded-big-brother dept.

El Reg :

Analysis In the wake of the FBI's failed fight against Apple, Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have introduced a draft bill that would effectively ban strong crypto.

The bill would require tech and communications companies to allow law enforcement with a court order to decrypt their customers' data. Last week a draft copy of the bill, dubbed the Compliance with Court Orders Act of 2016, was leaked, but the new version is even worse than the discussion draft.

In the draft version, court orders could only be issued for a crime resulting in death or serious bodily harm, terrorism and espionage, crimes against minors, serious violent felonies or Federal drug crimes. In the final version, those caveats are gone, so any court order will allow the police to access the data they want.

The bill would apply to "device manufacturers, software manufacturers, electronic communication services, remote communication services, providers of wire or electronic communication services, providers of remote communication services, or any person who provides a product or method to facilitate a communication or to process or store data." That's a pretty wide net.

"No entity or individual is above the law," said Feinstein. "The bill we have drafted would simply provide that, if a court of law issues an order to render technical assistance or provide decrypted data, the company or individual would be required to do so.

"Today, terrorists and criminals are increasingly using encryption to foil law enforcement efforts, even in the face of a court order. We need strong encryption to protect personal data, but we also need to know when terrorists are plotting to kill Americans."

Idiots, I tell you, they're a pair of idiots.


Original Submission #1
Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Friday April 15 2016, @12:53AM

    by edIII (791) on Friday April 15 2016, @12:53AM (#331957)

    They are such fucking morons.

    (b) DESIGN LIMITATIONS.—Nothing in this Act may
    be construed to authorize any government officer to re-
    quire or prohibit any specific design or operating system
    to be adopted by any covered entity
    .
    (c) LICENSE DISTRIBUTORS.—A provider of remote
    computing service or electronic communication service to
    the public that distributes licenses for products, services,
    applications, or software of or by a covered entity shall
    ensure that any such products, services, applications, or
    software distributed by such person be capable of com-
    plying with subsection (a).

    So I'm not limited to choosing zero knowledge encryption, or end-to-end encryption as a specific design restriction, but then I am restricted to NOT use zero knowledge encryption, or end-to-end encryption.

    Which is it?

    (I) the local network and public
    Internet Protocol addresses or any
    similar or successor protocol; and
    (II) addressing information that
    may be dynamically or privately as-
    signed, including port numbers or any
    successor addressing method
    .

    Uhhh, fuck you. Even if you were going to pay me for all the associated costs of storage, you just asked me to record something every 15 fucking seconds, from every fucking line, every fucking extension..... you wouldn't record this information in production. It's useless beyond real-time diagnostics. This is just more meta data for their Eyes Of Horus.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Geotti on Friday April 15 2016, @04:10AM

    by Geotti (1146) on Friday April 15 2016, @04:10AM (#332053) Journal

    Uhm...

    A provider [...] shall
    ensure that any such products, services, applications, or
    software [...] be capable of com-
    plying with subsection (a) [i.e. provide, or create the means to access data in an intelligible format]

    So, basically this could be used to make you put in a backdoor in your zero-knowledge "infrastructure" (i.e. inside the app itself).
    They're just updating the All Writs act and naming it COCOA, so Apple knows, who this is about.