Tech companies should be required...

[poptab]

FBI director: Tech companies should be required to make devices wire-tap friendly - The Washington Post

well what say you?

i think this guy is full of ****.

 

[hooky]

This is what people point to when the say you can't trust capitalism and the markets. Of course, it's neither.

 

[eric001]

I think he should be directed to do long walk off a short pier into a pond full of hungry alligators. At least by feeding them, he'd be doing some kind of good deed.

 

[MCgrease08]

I saw a quote from somebody from an alphabet soup agency (FBI I think) saying that the move by Apple will "protect pedophiles."

I guess getting a warrant is just too darn troublesome these days.

 

[pudly]

No sympathy here. <<redacted>>

 

[winchester]

FBI director: Tech companies should be required to make devices wire-tap friendly - The Washington Post

well what say you?

i think this guy is full of ****.

and they still will be wire tap friendly. i think this is nothing more than feel good marketing to sell more phones.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

[video=youtube;ILEHMZVIMcQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILEHMZVIMcQ[/video]

Warrants are meaningless - iMessages/MMS on Apple devices are now encrypted. Even with a warrant, they could not be decrypted without the user letting them. I for one am beyond tired of government acting like a petulant child simply because freedom has the potential to be abused. And, while it whines about not being able to see bad people do bad things, there are systems approaching perfection that enable precisely that anonymity.

Irony - Comey telling Americans not trust government as he begs for backdoors to be built in:

DailyTech - FBI Director: Don't Trust Government, But Give It Your Data Without Transparency

Just unbelievable double-speak.

 

[MCgrease08]

and they still will be wire tap friendly. i think this is nothing more than feel good marketing to sell more phones.

This isn't about wiretapping. It basically allows phone companies to tell .gov to pound sand when they come asking for access to content stored on the device without the owner's knowledge.

It will eliminate backdoor access, making the owner the only one that can unlock the phone. It will also help protect against hacking.

They can still tap phones with the proper warrant.

 

[poptab]

and they still will be wire tap friendly. i think this is nothing more than feel good marketing to sell more phones.

I don't think it's only feel good, but it is marketing.

 

[MCgrease08]

[video=youtube;ILEHMZVIMcQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILEHMZVIMcQ[/video]

Warrants are meaningless - iMessages/MMS on Apple devices are now encrypted. Even with a warrant, they could not be decrypted without the user letting them. I for one am beyond tired of government acting like a petulant child simply because freedom has the potential to be abused. And, while it whines about not being able to see bad people do bad things, there are systems approaching perfection that enable precisely that anonymity.

Irony - Comey telling Americans not trust government as he begs for backdoors to be built in:

DailyTech - FBI Director: Don't Trust Government, But Give It Your Data Without Transparency

Just unbelievable double-speak.

I wouldn't say warrants are totally obsolete. Law enforcement agencies could get a warrant to seize the device then a judge could order the owner to unlock the device under penalty of law if they don't. At least that's my understanding.

The FBI is cheesed because now an owner could wipe the phone once he/she realizes they are under investigation, similar to flushing drugs down the toilet.

To this I say, tough tamales.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

I wouldn't say warrants are totally obsolete. Law enforcement agencies could get a warrant to seize the device then a judge could order the owner to unlock the device under penalty of law if they don't. At least that's my understanding.

The FBI is cheesed because now an owner could wipe the phone once he/she realizes they are under investigation, similar to flushing drugs down the toilet.

To this I say, tough tamales.

In America, there is no law penalizing failure to provide encryption keys. This isn't Britain. We have the right not to self-incriminate. Despite what, two court cases, there is no law penalizing failure to provide decryption keys.

Key disclosure law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ModernGunner]

F.B.I. needs to spend their time hunting down actual criminals. It's called "leg work".

 

[MCgrease08]

In America, there is no law penalizing failure to provide encryption keys. This isn't Britain. We have the right not to self-incriminate. Despite what, two court cases, there is no law penalizing failure to provide decryption keys.

Key disclosure law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good point. I know I read something recently that included something about a judge ordering people to unlock the devices. That may have just been wishful thinking from FBI guy.

I'll see if I can find the article.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Good point. I know I read something recently that included something about a judge ordering people to unlock the devices. That may have just been wishful thinking from FBI guy.

I'll see if I can find the article.

You probably did. Judges have done that, twice. Then the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals slapped them down and said 'no, that's un-Constitutional, you can't force people to do that.'

 

[winchester]

This isn't about wiretapping. It basically allows phone companies to tell .gov to pound sand when they come asking for access to content stored on the device without the owner's knowledge.

It will eliminate backdoor access, making the owner the only one that can unlock the phone. It will also help protect against hacking.

They can still tap phones with the proper warrant.

sounds good but privacy is gone forever. read what they did to Ladar Levison Owner and Operator, Lavabit LLC when he tried to keep the feds from reading his clients private emails. Lavabit,

Lavabit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[HeadlessRoland]

sounds good but privacy is gone forever. read what they did to Ladar Levison Owner and Operator, Lavabit LLC when he tried to keep the feds from reading his clients private emails. Lavabit,

Lavabit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They futilely tried to have him relinquish the master key for the database and he flipped them the middle finger and shut it down. This may be a technical win for government and its censorship, but no data was compromised. Additionally, the service didn't do anything more than PGP/GPG does now for email service.

 

[winchester]

They futilely tried to have him relinquish the master key for the database and he flipped them the middle finger and shut it down. This may be a technical win for government and its censorship, but no data was compromised. Additionally, the service didn't do anything more than PGP/GPG does now for email service.

ok so will apple shut its doors or will it quietly give the feds the key and tell the consumer with privacy concerns that your info is secure with our new phone?

 

[HeadlessRoland]

ok so will apple shut its doors or will it quietly give the feds the key and tell the consumer with privacy concerns that your info is secure with our new phone?

Neither. Look, Lavabit had to close because Levinson chose to exert control over data - he had the ability to decrypt users' information because of the algorithms he implemented with Lavabit - he essentially backdoored it. He did comply with warrants and subpoenas served to him before the last overarching, we-want-all-data command they sent him, because the way Lavabit was implemented, it was possible for him to do so. Apple is not utilizing that style of implementation, of holding any master keys. Even if government were to stamp its feet for another thousand years, since Apple doesn't even have the keys, there's no way for Apple to decrypt the information even if they wanted to, and thus it's pointless for government to continue to hound Apple about it. Could they devise an encryption scheme that also lets them retain a master key? Yes, in the next iteration or somewhere down the line, sure. But a researcher would reverse-engineer it and announce that fact and Apple would then, at the cost of submitting itself to the whims of government, lose market share and thus profit. It remains disinclined via the market to ever do so. I applaud Apple for taking things in the right direction. Next, true iCloud encryption (which currently can be subpoena'd and easily obtained by a third-party adversary).

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/0...ion-under-ios-8-making-handover-to-cops-moot/

 

[Bunnykid68]

I wouldn't say warrants are totally obsolete. Law enforcement agencies could get a warrant to seize the device then a judge could order the owner to unlock the device under penalty of law if they don't. At least that's my understanding.

The FBI is cheesed because now an owner could wipe the phone once he/she realizes they are under investigation, similar to flushing drugs down the toilet.

To this I say, tough tamales.

Sounds like an excuse for a no knock SWAT raid potentially

 

[Bunnykid68]

F.B.I. needs to spend their time hunting down actual criminals. It's called "leg work".

You think they should start pulling people over for infractions just to run their papers?