SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
FBI Director Christopher Wray said Wednesday that unless the U.S. government and private industry are able to come to a compromise on the issue of default encryption on consumer devices, legislation may be how the debate is ultimately decided.
"I think there should be [room for compromise]," Wray said Wednesday night at a national security conference in Aspen, Colorado. "I don't want to characterize private conversations we're having with people in the industry. We're not there yet for sure. And if we can't get there, there may be other remedies, like legislation, that would have to come to bear."
Wray described the issue of “Going Dark” because of encryption as a "significant" and "growing" problem for federal, state and local law enforcement as well as foreign law enforcement and intelligence agencies. He claims strong encryption on mobile phones keeps law enforcement from gaining access to key evidence as it relates to active criminal investigations.
Source: FBI director: Without compromise on encryption, legislation may be the 'remedy'
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday July 22 2018, @10:57PM (12 children)
I wouldn't worry too much about this, as it has played out before, in the Crypto Wars of the 1990's, which had the US military trying and failing to ban the export of strong encryption.
The problem for the people trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle, is that encryption is basically maths, and nobody has the monopoly on maths.
Legislation is not only not the answer, it is an admission that they've lost the war (again).
(Score: 5, Insightful) by https on Sunday July 22 2018, @11:27PM
Fuck that. The only reason crypto isn't outlawed outright now in the US is because people did worry about it. The bastards are relentless. Step zero in fighting back against the malice and idiocy is worrying about it.
Weak crypto means they can take your money and claim (with legal, not mathematical, definitions of proof) that you are the one who spent it. Or that you have a lolita comple^W^W^W are a pedophile. Or were planning to bomb city hall at 12:30. Worry is 100% a reasonable reaction.
Sure, this has played out before. But if you don't worry about it... it will play out differently. THEY ONLY HAVE TO WIN ONCE.
Offended and laughing about it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 22 2018, @11:57PM (6 children)
I don't understand what "compromise" might be. Will 0 suddenly = 0.00000000001 and 1 = 1.1? What IS a compromise in math? For as long as mankind has understood mathematical concepts, 1 has been 1, 2 has been 2, etc. It seems that maybe some early cultures may not have grasped the zero, but still, zero has been zero ever since it was discovered. So, how does one compromise on any of that?
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 4, Informative) by requerdanos on Monday July 23 2018, @12:17AM (2 children)
To compromise encryption means simply "~ to render it non-working" which sets a much, much lower bar.
You could limit any encryption to 8 or 16 bits, or if that's too hard, allow only the use of ROT13, or any other mathematical trickery you can think of that will make easily reversible scrambling possible, but encryption impossible.
Since people whose area of knowledge isn't encryption (i.e. almost everyone) might think that "compromise" is a friendly, happy, constructive, and encouraging thing, not knowing its meaning within that sphere, Wray seems to be looking for sympathy in a manipulative way, while plainly demanding an end to encryption.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Monday July 23 2018, @03:28AM (1 child)
Exactly. Wray is full of bull pucky. Either strong encryption is possible, or it is not possible. Either everyone can communicate securely, or no one can. There's no compromise in which some people can communicate securely, and the rest can't.
It's this kind of failure to comprehend reality plus the arrogance to think that they do get it, that has the tech world convinced that the legal world is and always will be clueless. Admittedly, Wray is part of the Trump administration, which is noted for their severe affliction with the Dunning-Kruger effect. But there have been many examples from the legal world unconnected with the current administration that show their incompetence. They don't get it about copyright and software patents either. Then there's the excessively harsh punishments for hacking, which I take to be cowardice. They're so skeered of haxxors they crap themselves, then go on witch hunts.
Then you have downright stupid court cases such as the one about the innocent American citizen on America's kill list for drones. And the petty abuses of the legal system to pervert and corrupt it into a money grab, with, for example the red light camera tickets and the parking meter tickets. Justice is most definitely not blind to money, and it should be. The super rich behind the 2008 market collapse walk away with a fine that would be impossible for anyone in the 99% to pay, but for them it is a light wrist slap, while petty criminals with dark skins get ten years for shoplifting $2 worth of goods.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 23 2018, @07:42PM
Aside from all the other nonsense in your post, let's be clear about one thing: Wray's affiliation with Trump has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the FBI wanting to break/outlaw/backdoor encryption.
That's been a consistent wishlist item for them for decades.
(Score: 2) by archfeld on Monday July 23 2018, @01:18AM
The 'concept' of zero has been the same, but the reality of it keeps changing as our technology and ability to measure gets better. Eventually we may come to discover that zero really is only a concept and never a physical reality, but who know, Shirly says not I.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Monday July 23 2018, @02:16AM (1 child)
"What IS a compromise in math?"
2+2=5
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Monday July 23 2018, @08:31AM
Or the Inidiana Pi Bill [wikipedia.org]?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by requerdanos on Monday July 23 2018, @12:09AM
Well, maybe.
"It shall be henceforth required that Wray and his FBI buddies keep their fat fingers off encrypted devices existing within or owned by persons within the United States of America, and instead be required to protect the rights of each individual resident of or visitor to the United States. Wray or any of his FBI or other LEO/TLA buddies found guilty of not working diligently to protect the civil rights of each individual shall be guilty of one count each of violation of the said individual's civil rights, with the penalty not to exceed life imprisonment upon a single count."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday July 23 2018, @04:00PM
Sort of. Except that trying to conceal knowledge is generally not possible, and impossible after it has been publicly shared.
But it is not possible to regulate and criminalize the use of knowledge.
The strategy will be that anyone wanting to use encryption electronically will either use a pre-approved (read:backdoored) product, or that the use of non-approved encryption products becomes a criminal offense in and of itself. It will be worded in a way that makes in constitutionally defensible - you have a constitutional right to free speech and to not self-incriminate but you have no right to freely encrypt that speech nor to avoid divulging keys in the face of a warrant. The law will enshrine that.
This is the FBI saying that if "industry" doesn't roll along with developing a product that can be backdoored the legislation will be still harder on the corporations and there will be a regulator which develops the standards used instead of letting industry set their own (with the approval of TPTB).
You individual users don't count or have a say.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday July 24 2018, @03:31AM (1 child)
I dearly wish I could have a monopoly on English however, if only to sentence you to a slapping. "Maths" is not a word. "Mathematics" is not plural. There is no such thing as a "mathematic". "Mathematics" is a non countable abstract concept, of which the abbreviated form is "math", just like "physics" is a non countable abstract concept, for which there is no singular form "physic".
Yes, language is dynamic. If enough people use "maths", then it will enter the official lexicon. But dammit, I'm going to fight it all the way there.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday July 24 2018, @03:57AM
Sorry mate.
The English I speak has always had it as maths, not math.
You will just have to accept it as one of the limitations of being a colonial.