Germany's Interior Minister Wants Backdoors In Cars, Digital Devices
According to a new report from German newspaper Redaktions Netzwerk Deutschland (RND), Germany's Interior Minister, Thomas de Maizièr, has written a draft proposal in which he would like German cars, as well as other digital devices being sold in Germany, to grant police backdoor access. The minister is expected to present the proposal at next week's Ministry of Interior conference.
According to the RND report, the German minister would like intelligence agencies and police to gain "exclusive" access to cars, as well as digital devices such as computers, mobile devices, kitchen appliances, and smart TVs. The "back door" access would, in essence, allow the government to bypass the security protections some of these devices have. The police have been complaining that sometimes they can't install intercept equipment on some cars because their security systems are "too good."
Maizièr would also like cars and digital devices to have a "kill switch" the government can use at will to shut down certain devices, allegedly to stop cybercrime.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06 2017, @04:13PM (6 children)
...then these measures will not be required
(Score: 3, Insightful) by turgid on Wednesday December 06 2017, @05:02PM (4 children)
Don't be daft. They'll keep inventing new bogeymen as required.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday December 06 2017, @07:30PM (3 children)
[_] Thoughtcrime (not yet available, but coming soon!)
[x] Think Of The Children!
[x] Terrorists
[_] Eviodoers
[_] Drug lords
[_] War lords
[_] Hippies
[_] Communists
[_] Axis of Evil
People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by turgid on Wednesday December 06 2017, @08:53PM (2 children)
We have Thoughtcrime here in the UK already. They might not officially charge you with a crime, but they will take you away for questioning at the most inconvenient time and put you on a list of people to watch.
There is a growing canon of literature known as "terrorist propaganda" that one dare not accidentally stumble upon lest one get added to one of these lists. You see, the problem is, some vulnerable people randomly become terrorists and it's difficult to predict. So what they do is use a very blunt instrument - if you look at something you might be going to turn into one eventually, who knows - they take you away and talk to you. Presumably this is to scare you out of becoming a terrorist (yes, quite).
Now we have a collection of "forbidden literature" (banned books) that normal intelligent people with critical thinking skills may not read. Who is custodian of this list? Who decided what you may or may not look at? Do you feel lucky?
Now that we are not allowed to use our own critical thinking skills and judgement, we just have to take it as a matter of faith that some things are bad, very bad, very exceedingly bad indeed. We need to be careful to avoid the forbidden literature. We just have to accept and do as we are told, and perhaps be glad that if we are wrongly inconvenienced, interrogated or even imprisoned that ultimately it's for our own good, and especially the good of our country. I'm a patriot. So are you. We have nothing to fear!
The forbidden list may keep on growing and we may never know... We may be under surveillance and we may never know. I have nothing to hide! I'm stark naked under my clothes, after all.
Does wikipedia have an entry for gunpowder? Does it list the ingredients? I don't know, and I daren't look. You're not allowed to search online for how to make explosives. You will be taken away for a chat, so the story goes.
I really don't want to find out. I haven't the time to waste. PC Plod has no sense of humour, very poor social skills and a very authoritarian sense of judgement.
Posted not as AC because, you know, free speech and irony.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday December 06 2017, @09:08PM (1 child)
Wow.
I thought that was what the US was working toward. But you've already got it? Wow.
People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Wednesday December 06 2017, @09:41PM
Yes.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday December 07 2017, @10:51AM
We should not sacrifice our liberties even in the face of actual threats. So these measures are only "required" if you possess an authoritarian mindset.