SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the nothing-to-hide-vs-none-of-your-business dept.
The New York Times published an interesting story about the fears of the current FBI director:
The director of the F.B.I., James B. Comey, said Thursday that federal laws should be changed to require telecommunications companies to give law enforcement agencies access to the encrypted communications of individuals suspected of crimes.
... Mr. Comey warned that crimes could go unsolved if law enforcement officers cannot gain access to information that technology companies like Apple and Google are protecting using increasingly sophisticated encryption technology.
“Unfortunately, the law hasn’t kept pace with technology, and this disconnect has created a significant public safety problem,” he said.
Mr. Comey said that he was hoping to spur Congress to update the 20-year-old Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which does not require companies to give law enforcement direct access to individuals’ communications.
The F.B.I. has long had concerns about devices “going dark” — when technology becomes so sophisticated that the authorities cannot gain access to them. But now, Mr. Comey is warning that the new encryption technology has evolved to the point that it could adversely affect crime solving.
The kicker is this line:
“Those charged with protecting our people aren’t always able to access the evidence we need to prosecute crime and prevent terrorism, even with lawful authority."
Of course, it should be no surprise to the FBI why so many people are going "dark" and using things like Tails. For decades, the government has proven time and again that it can't be trusted to act lawfully and constitutionally. The FBI is responsible for more than its share of that. So naturally those who can are going to take steps to protect their privacy and Apple and Google, among others, are simply responding to that demand.
(Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Friday October 17 2014, @12:00PM
Does anyone here actually encrypt their phones.?
What about a passcode/pattern lock.?
I have a complicated pattern lock, but no encryption. I do think about enabling it though
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Friday October 17 2014, @01:52PM
iOS devices are encrypted by default, and soon Android devices will be as well. Both iOS and Android push lock codes on the user these days. A person would have to go out of their way to not use one.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 17 2014, @02:34PM
iOS devices are encrypted by default
And I'm sure Apple would happily hand over the keys if the NSA so much as waggled an eyebrow in their direction. It's Apple...there's no way they can't just extract your keys if they wanted to.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Saturday October 18 2014, @02:13PM
That was the whole point of the iOS 8.0 changes, they removed the keys from their own control.
Keep in mind too, Apple was one of the LAST companies to be pulled into PRISM. Google was one of the first. So no reason to try to single out Apple there.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday October 20 2014, @02:33PM
I guess I'm still surprised that the NSA hasn't gotten pissy about that yet. Because everybody knows encryption is just for Us, not for anybody else!
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Saturday October 25 2014, @07:15PM
Well when you intercept practically all network traffic, why care about how it's stored on the endpoint? Not to mention they still have their malware that can hijack the device.
(Score: 2, Funny) by srobert on Friday October 17 2014, @03:04PM
"Does anyone here actually encrypt their phones.?"
Of course I don't. Only terrorists and pedophiles encrypt their phones.
We are getting near to a point in the U.S. where advocating privacy will be considered a crime in and of itself.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by melikamp on Friday October 17 2014, @04:19PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 17 2014, @05:16PM
Do you use a computer? Intel?
VT/VPro is built in to all newer i3 i5 and i7 chips.
So there is your nice little remotely accessible VNC server happy to let the government rulers look at the framebuffer on your integrated videocard.
They can also directly access your ram.
Makes sure you don't fancy pretty young females over spinster feminists.
(Score: 2) by melikamp on Friday October 17 2014, @05:35PM
No one is happy about blobs burned into chips, but trolling won't get you anywhere, AC. Care to describe how they can connect to the VNC server? Oh, that's right, they just need to connect out-of-band with a thick black cable. Compare it to your phone, which happily reports your location and everything you type more or less in real-time, and won't even let you remove pre-installed ads.
Do us all a favor, crawl back under the bridge.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by jcross on Friday October 17 2014, @08:25PM
Holy smokes, mod parent insightful! I had never considered that they might be making a big stink to lure us into a false sense of security. It's the perfect way to convince everyone that they are safe, as long as the TLAs can keep it secret that they have a backdoor. Kind of similar to how the Allies played the Enigma crack in WWII.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 18 2014, @05:27AM
It makes the phone makers look like the good guys. And they sell more phones. Faster.
While those platforms are easily looked thru.
Everyone wins.
Well. The people kind of get fucked. But that was going to happen anyway.
This way more money gets made. Faster.
(Score: 2) by marcello_dl on Sunday October 19 2014, @04:45PM
Theoretically there is trouble even when the OS is fully free software, in smartphones the modem/radio is a coprocessor with access to the host's RAM. Of course those modems have a proprietary OS.