Apple CEO Tim Cook Speaks at White House Cybersecurity Summit

[gnasher729]

Is there any doubt that iCloud is fed directly to the NSA data centers?

Among the paranoid, no.
Among the not so paranoid, they think your suggestion is utter nonsense.

No offence to Apple or Tim here, but Apple aren't exactly the best at security.

So who is the best at security? And what exactly is Apple doing that wouldn't be secure? Easy to make vague accusations, but you should post something real.

 

[MacNut]

The easiest way to stop cyber warfare is 100% complete encryption. But that won't fly with the government, how would they spy on us. So instead their idea is to "share data" on threats.

 

[kage207]

But that model isn't true in software. You can make two keys for an account, and hold one, the government's key, on a secure proxy site. Then a judge would issue a warrant, and if they handle the proxy storage well, they search your personal effects. That would have to leave a clear forensic trail in case some cop does an unauthorized search.

That would, constitutionally, be the same system we have in the real world. It would hold for all residents and citizens of the United States. Obviously, the details would be different for other countries. Complete privacy is not only a myth, it's a destructive one.

You don't seem to know about Software Engineering, particularly in regards to security. There's this great advantage of software security to design in layers but also reducing the attack surface. Having two keys increases your surface area of attack.

Just like a house, having multiple people, whom have keys, increases the risk of someone getting their key stolen so that someone can use it to gain entrance into your home. Having more keys available, grants more opportunities for one to be stolen.

This is my problem with PRISM. They are holding onto people's data on government servers. I'm not sure if they are still on Google's or whoever as well but they have increased the surface area for potential attackers.

Secondly, there's a partice of trust but verify. There's no way to verify how the government holds this key. I can trust that they will hold onto the key properly but I can't independently verify this. That is not good.

Also, how do I know that the government isn't just using that key to get to my data anyways? There's plenty of things wrong with your argument. I am not for complete privacy but software does not work the way you think it does.

I am however for privacy but for a check and balance, and a trust but verify. Just like a warrant, I have to be notified when the government searches my house, so I should be given the same opportunity with my data.

I have not presented any solutions because I don't know the answer but I do not want to give up my rights to privacy. Not only do I want to protect my personal information but my work as well. There must be a balance but I do not know the answer and we must take more time to find one. People need to know why your idea is flawed.

 

[technosix]

The easiest way to stop cyber warfare is 100% complete encryption. But that won't fly with the government, how would they spy on us. So instead their idea is to "share data" on threats.

Very well said.

Tomorrow's the big day! There's history about to be made.

Under the cleverly labeled ruse known as Net-Neutrality, the control of the entire Internet is gradually and somewhat covertly being migrated to the UN. (read China & Russia). Granted this is a multi year project, but the starting gun goes off nearly unchallenged by those unhappy with the rhetoric.

Listen carefully, that sucking sound is the money being vacuumed from tax payers wallets. Just the first of many contributions by the masses.

The head golfer and his band of yes men & women are besides themselves in glee and piles of that green stuff. They are masters of the game.