Most common encryption protocols are useless against NSA surveillance

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Sep 6, 2013.

  1. MacNut, Sep 6, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2013

    MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #1
    http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/5/46...rotocols-are-useless-against-nsa-surveillance

    After that story came out, the government got angry...

    http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/6/47...s-snowden-leaks-a-road-map-to-our-adversaries
     
  2. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #2
    If you are not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to hide from the Government.
     
  3. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #3
    Like bank records? or medical records?
     
  4. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #4
    If you are trying to hide your bank records from the government you must be doing something wrong.

    Why worry about Medical data? The government is going to have full access to that one way or another.
     
  5. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #5
    You mean like a list of gun owners?
     
  6. wrkactjob macrumors 65816

    wrkactjob

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #6
    Is the implication here that the governments can crack RSA code structure?
     
  7. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #7
    Right... because you can absolutely trust the government to keep all of the medical, personal, business, and financial data its collected on you and your family completely safe and secure from being stolen and/or abused by unscrupulous parties.
     
  8. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #8
    Does it matter?

    If they can exploit weak keys or have backdoors does it really matter?
    If the implementation is flawed the outcome is the same.
     
  9. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #9
    Do you trust the government not to screw you over at some point?

    If this stuff is no big deal why is the government getting upset when it is released?
     
  10. elistan, Sep 6, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2013

    elistan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #10
    If the Government is not doing anything illegal, it has nothing to hide from the citizens in whose interest it serves.

    ----------

    Based on some discussion I've read, the actual mathematical basis for encryption algorithms is sound, and not cracked.

    But the program performing the decryption might be compromised.
    Or the storage of the keys might be compromised.
    Or the certificate authority handing out certs might be compromised.
    Or the device that performs the decryption might be compromised.
    Or the random number generator's algorithm might be compromised.
    Or the seed values for the random number generator might be compromised.
     
  11. astrorider macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #11
    Our government is supposed to be leading the charge to ensure our Constitutional rights, not circumvent them.
     
  12. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #12
    So you will defend the 2nd amendment, but not the 4th?

    Anyway, this isn't surprising. I sort of expect our government to be able to break encryptions.... The fact they are breaking them on American citizens without proper warrants, etc is the troubling part. But, we already knew the NSA was spying on us. So what of this is new information?
     
  13. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #13
    It is all about "limits" right?

    The Government doesn't want me to own gun X and the government just wants to know you are not talking to terrorists.

    Seems logical to me...
     
  14. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #14
    This, FTW.

    You do realize that this is the same tired argument used to defend the PATRIOT Act as well as those warrantless wiretapping laws passed by the Bush administration in the early 2000s, right? This completely brought back the meaning of Ben Franklin's statement that those who sacrifice liberties for safety and security deserve neither.

    I'll ask this: If you didn't have anything to hide or protect from the government, why would you pride yourself so much in your constant use of the 2nd Amendment to defend yourself from the government?

    Back on topic. Let's take banks as an example. In the Payment Card Industry (yes, banks, credit cards, and their transactions), a lot of those files are sent over SFTP, which uses SSL for their encryption. If the NSA has a method of cracking that, think about how many files are transferred between credit card processors per day, per bank. Furthermore, think about how many credit card numbers and transactions (both domestic and international) are in those files. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but with that means and access to those files, they could make purchases with yours, mine, or anyone else's credit card, debit card, or ATM card. You're talking about the potential of government backed credit and bank fraud.

    And you don't think that is a problem? To be blunt, you can't go out and buy guns and bullets to enjoy your use of the 2nd Amendment if you don't have the money to do so, because the NSA has drained that out of your account.

    And don't even get me started on HIPAA.

    It all boils down to magnitude, and a lot of people here don't really understand it, especially with the potential damage that could happen in this situation.

    BL.
     
  15. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    Banning certain guns has always been found to be constitutional...
     
  16. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #16

    Most people on this forum think the second amendment is something that doesn't belong or feel the government has the right to alter it or bypass it anyway they see fit.

    So.... What is wrong with playing with the 1st, 4th, 6th or 8th in the same way???

    Read my tagline. You can mock the Constitution and if you feel it is okay to undermine parts of it that is fine but once you start down that path you are going find the outcome isn't as simple or pretty as you once thought.
     
  17. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #17
    The difference here is that people are all up for defending the rights guaranteed under the 2nd Amendment, but with comments like:

    people show that they are either condoning, or complacent in the condoning of the government taking away your 4th Amendment rights. Your defense of the Constitution shouldn't end at the Amendments you only prefer; it should be all or nothing.

    BL.
     
  18. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    I don't think many people here think the second amendment shouldn't apply.
     
  19. xShane macrumors 6502a

    xShane

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Location:
    United States
    #19
    Worst statement I've ever heard.

    You're willing to just rollover and throw all of your rights out of the window?
     
  20. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #20
    Why have you avoided the question I asked you in post #5?
     
  21. Merkava_4 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #21
    What would you people think if the Government was able to hack into your memories and your thoughts? Oh that's right, I forgot, this is still 2013, not 2113 yet. Our computers are still outside of our bodies at the present time.
     
  22. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #22
    They have that list, I am not happy about it.

    It doesn't change the fact they people want to gutt the 2nd but when something like this is discovered everyone gets all upset.

    Well, this is what you wanted right? You wanted to be safe right? Well they are trying to make you safe!
     
  23. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #23
    Yet you still continue to avoid the fact that this is gutting the 4th, which judging by your comment, you don't seem to have any problem with.

    Again, the Constitution isn't a 'pick and choose'; you either have to support all of it, or take your own advice, support none of it, and move.

    BL.
     
  24. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #24
    I am just saying if limits are okay for one part of the Constitution then what is wrong with limits on other parts, like the 4th.

    Again, only the guilty will have something to hide from the Government.
     
  25. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #25
    There are limits on the 4th Amendment. If you think it's unlimited, you haven't done your homework.

    Then why did you post this:
    You're unhappy about the Government knowing your gun purchases. Why? If you're not guilty of anything, then why are you unhappy about them having a list? Please explain this contradiction.

    From 2007, so not a new issue:
    https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/07/privacy_and_the.html
     

Share This Page