SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Friday April 15 2016, @02:09AM
I didn't threaten her in any way. What I did was state in simple terms that her encryption proposal did in fact have serious and daunting design restrictions, and moreover, that encryption was a human right. To demand I not implement zero knowledge or end-to-end encryption solutions when she also demands I effect privacy is ludicrous. As a small business I was unfairly burdened with additional unremunerated costs not covered in her proposed bill, and my customers were unfairly denied technology to increase our levels of security and remain competitive in the global technology sectors.
In any case, I told her I was going to make a stand like the Apple employees that would quit before compromising the iPhone for "her". Whatever happened, I would never stop helping to design and implement zero knowledge and end-to-end solutions, even for free to anyone who asked. Re-education camps were mentioned, and not as hyperbole. She would need to have me reprogrammed before I assist in creating key escrow solutions that are not even technically viable, and she better remember to reprogram me to *not* vote for somebody else the next election.
Even mentioned Gandhi and MLK at the end :)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 15 2016, @03:04AM
Welcome to the terrorist watch list.
You seem to be under the delusion that the powers that be don't see refusing to comply with their demands as "ideological extremism". Consider yourself radicalized, they do.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Friday April 15 2016, @07:08AM
You know what... I don't care. If I'm on a terrorist watch list for having a reasonable discussion with my Senator as one of her constituents... then a terrorist I be.
I'm not going to be afraid to talk to my Senators, especially about controversial and uncomfortable subjects that need to be discussed like this.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 15 2016, @05:08AM
You can always tell a politician, but you can't tell 'em much.