Jump to content


Photo

Government's ongoing war on encryption


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 dagomike

dagomike

    Comptroller of CrapPapples

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12644 posts

Posted 15 January 2020 - 06:17 AM

New York Times:

 

 

Late Monday, after Mr. Barr had complained that the company had provided no “substantive assistance” in gaining access to the phones used in the Pensacola shooting, Apple said it rejected that characterization. It added that “encryption is vital to protecting our country and our users’ data.”

 

 

“The F.B.I.’s technical experts — as well as those consulted outside of the organization — have played an integral role in this investigation,” an F.B.I. spokeswoman said. “The consensus was reached, after all efforts to access the shooter’s phones had been unsuccessful, that the next step was to reach out to start a conversation with Apple.”

 
Security researchers speculated that in the Pensacola case, the F.B.I. might still be trying a brute-force attack to get into the phones. They said major physical damage may have impeded any third-party tools from opening the devices. The Pensacola gunman had shot the iPhone 7 Plus once and tried destroying the iPhone 5, according to F.B.I. photos.
 
The F.B.I. said it fixed the iPhones in a lab so that they would turn on, but the authorities still couldn’t bypass their encryption. Security researchers and the former Apple executive said any damage that prevented third-party tools from working would also preclude a solution from Apple.

A Justice Department spokeswoman said in an email: “Apple designed these phones and implemented their encryption. It’s a simple, ‘front-door’ request: Will Apple help us get into the shooter’s phones or not?”
 

Oh, #### off


  • 0

#2 BrewerGeorge

BrewerGeorge

    His Royal Misinformed

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35625 posts
  • LocationIndianapolis

Posted 15 January 2020 - 06:20 AM

New York Times:

 

 

 

Oh, ####off

This



#3 JKor

JKor

    Puller of Meats

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 48614 posts
  • LocationNW of Boston

Posted 15 January 2020 - 06:32 AM

I'm glad at least one of the tech giants is making some kind of stand for privacy.
  • 0

#4 dagomike

dagomike

    Comptroller of CrapPapples

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12644 posts

Posted 15 January 2020 - 06:46 AM

This is a really good summary of encryption, why end-to-end encryptions was implemented, why back door schemes don't work, and why you should be concerned even "if you don't have anything to hide."

 

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=CINVwWHlzTY


Edited by dagomike, 15 January 2020 - 06:47 AM.

  • 0

#5 dondewey

dondewey

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4567 posts
  • LocationVA

Posted 15 January 2020 - 07:15 AM

Has Apple said it can't help or won't help?
  • 0

#6 davelew

davelew

    Comptroller of ACMSO That Are Not Beans

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14565 posts
  • LocationReading, Massachusetts

Posted 15 January 2020 - 07:38 AM

Has Apple said it can't help or won't help?

 

My understanding is that Apple said it couldn't help, the government interpreted that to mean that Apple didn't want to help.


  • 0

#7 BlackBeerd

BlackBeerd

    Comptroller of Stain's Junk Posting

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17582 posts
  • LocationA Drunken Stupor

Posted 15 January 2020 - 07:48 AM

The above quote read to me as if Apple told them there was third party software that would do the same thing Apple could do. If that didn't work, nothing Apple could do would work. 


  • 0

#8 Stains_not_here_man

Stains_not_here_man

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85406 posts

Posted 15 January 2020 - 07:54 AM

Oh, #### off


Yep
  • 0

#9 dagomike

dagomike

    Comptroller of CrapPapples

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12644 posts

Posted 15 January 2020 - 07:55 AM

Has Apple said it can't help or won't help?

 

 

Here's Apple's statement on what it has done to assist.

 

The DOJ/FBI has been on record of wanting to use high-profile cases to pressure tech companies to build back doors. So, I'm skeptical of the DOJ's motivation when it chooses to hold a press conference/make press statements to call out businesses.

 

 

We were devastated to learn of the tragic terrorist attack on members of the US armed services at the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Florida on December 6th. We have the greatest respect for law enforcement and routinely work with police across the country on their investigations. When law enforcement requests our assistance, our teams work around the clock to provide them with the information we have.

 
We reject the characterization that Apple has not provided substantive assistance in the Pensacola investigation. Our responses to their many requests since the attack have been timely, thorough and are ongoing.
 
Within hours of the FBI's first request on December 6th, we produced a wide variety of information associated with the investigation. From December 7th through the 14th, we received six additional legal requests and in response provided information including iCloud backups, account information and transactional data for multiple accounts.
 
We responded to each request promptly, often within hours, sharing information with FBI offices in Jacksonville, Pensacola and New York. The queries resulted in many gigabytes of information that we turned over to investigators. In every instance, we responded with all of the information that we had.
 
The FBI only notified us on January 6th that they needed additional assistance — a month after the attack occurred. Only then did we learn about the existence of a second iPhone associated with the investigation and the FBI's inability to access either iPhone. It was not until January 8th that we received a subpoena for information related to the second iPhone, which we responded to within hours. Early outreach is critical to accessing information and finding additional options.
 
We are continuing to work with the FBI, and our engineering teams recently had a call to provide additional technical assistance. Apple has great respect for the Bureau's work, and we will work tirelessly to help them investigate this tragic attack on our nation.
 
We have always maintained there is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys. Backdoors can also be exploited by those who threaten our national security and the data security of our customers. Today, law enforcement has access to more data than ever before in history, so Americans do not have to choose between weakening encryption and solving investigations. We feel strongly encryption is vital to protecting our country and our users' data.

  • 0

#10 Genesee Ted

Genesee Ted

    yabba dabba doob

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39967 posts
  • LocationRochester, NY

Posted 15 January 2020 - 08:34 AM

They make a good point. If they can get in, so can others with nefarious intent.

#11 Trub L

Trub L

    Hooked on a Feelin

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 112411 posts
  • LocationIn the Middle

Posted 15 January 2020 - 05:02 PM

Yeah. You can argue all you want about what smartphones enable, but Apple hanging on to a back door would be an awful idea. I mean, the name of some engineer's first dog probably unlocks the entire ecosystem, but nothing that anybody in the brass would know about.
  • 0

#12 Stout_fan

Stout_fan

    Frequent Member

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2632 posts
  • LocationBalmer, Merlin, Hon

Posted 16 January 2020 - 12:21 PM

They make a good point. If they can get in, so can others with nefarious intent.

Oh, that would NEVER happen.

So how secure is the Winblows O/S that you are using?

 

Have the backdoors put in by the feds been exploited yet?

Never mind. I guess NSA was done with this one and decided to move on to the next backdoor they gave you.

 

Gee, I wonder if there is an O/S that is free of this stuff?


Edited by Stout_fan, 16 January 2020 - 12:31 PM.

  • 0

#13 Stout_fan

Stout_fan

    Frequent Member

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2632 posts
  • LocationBalmer, Merlin, Hon

Posted 16 January 2020 - 12:27 PM

LINUX!

 

Had to beat Kellermeister to the punch!


Edited by Stout_fan, 16 January 2020 - 12:27 PM.

  • 0

#14 dagomike

dagomike

    Comptroller of CrapPapples

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12644 posts

Posted 07 March 2020 - 07:01 PM

Wired on the proposed “Earn It” legislation.

 

https://www.wired.co...-on-encryption/

 

 

 

"This is a profoundly awful proposal on multiple levels," says Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, of the EARN IT Act. "It uses the laudable aim of fighting child exploitation to cynically launder law enforcement’s unsuccessful, decades-long effort to undermine strong end-to-end encryption. And it codifies the idea of using Section 230 immunity—without which no online platform could realistically risk hosting user-generated content at scale—as a cudgel to force private businesses to adopt government-approved content moderation practices."

 

 

 

"Encryption remains the elephant in the room," James Brokenshire, the United Kingdom's security minister, said during the DOJ press conference. "I’ve got to say that putting our children at risk for what I believe are marginal privacy gains is something I really struggle to believe any of us want."

 

#### off.

 

Privacy and security experts unanimously disagree with Brokenshire's assessment. The argument they have made for decades in defense of encryption is that any measure that undermines or eliminates it would expose millions of vulnerable people to invasive surveillance by both governments and criminals, like abusers. Meanwhile, in a world without strong encryption protections for regular people, governments and criminals would be the two main groups that would inevitably maintain exempt or illegal access to strongly encrypted tools.

  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users