So, basically this within 2 years. Will Linux be the chosen one?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Senate Draft Encryption Bill Called 'Absurd,' 'Dangerous,' and Technically Inept
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its just too bad we don't have some common sense in Washington DC. This is an important topic and its being treated as just another power grab.
What's strange is that I feel like Bernie is probably the lesser of all evils, and I'm a conservative-leaning moderate. That's pretty sad, lol. I like him as a man, even though he has some extreme ideas. I feel like that's a common theme this cycle. Everyone is so extreme. We need a more measured approach. Yeah, I think corporate tax rates are too low, but you can't just instantly make them skyrocket either. And you can't just socialize everything. And don't even get me started on the Trump craziness. What a whack job. I just want it to all go away. I'm hoping for contested conventions that will just choose someone new from both sides. Reset the whole election. It would be epic!
No it's not. This is.
I think you mean ludicrous.
On topic. Ignorance and opportunism is a caustic mix. Ignorance of encryption, how it works, and it's importance. Opportunistic politicians during election season latching onto a hot button topic for exposure.
Politics at it's best is a ****show. Doesn't matter Rep or Dem, red and blue give the citizens a purple eye.
edit: Apple should repatriate some of that cash mountain and create a lobbying arm. That's the only thing that gets a response from congress. Not cynicism, just fact.
Last edited:
Reading through the actual draft of the bill, it would appear that this bill would (perhaps unintentionally) apply to all password hashing mechanisms employed by cloud providers. Right?
Requiring that all passwords on servers have the ability to be decrypted would decrease security for every person that has an online account anywhere. The major hacks that have happened in the last few years would have caused much more hurt if the passwords were not simply hashes but strings that could be decrypted.
Requiring that all passwords on servers have the ability to be decrypted would decrease security for every person that has an online account anywhere. The major hacks that have happened in the last few years would have caused much more hurt if the passwords were not simply hashes but strings that could be decrypted.
" Senate Intelligence Committee "
Ironic name for a group of people who probably can hardly operate a cell phone and are making decisions on technology and complex issues.
Ironic name for a group of people who probably can hardly operate a cell phone and are making decisions on technology and complex issues.
Have you ever dealt with Senator Feinstein? She is an extremely self centered individual who feels as if she knows better than anyone. Unfortunately, she has a significant amount of political power that allows her to remain in office.
Last edited by a moderator:
Term Limits! Because 12 years is enough for anyone
Pretty much every bill that comes out of Congress is 'Absurd,' 'Dangerous,' and Technically Inept.
Frankly, Congress often doesn't write bills or even bother to read them.
The special interests write the bills, which is explained away because the special interests have the "needed expertise in their field." The special interests, which is everything really, then of course writes whatever the hell they favor.
Congress doesn't read the bills written by the special interests because they are too long, complicated, and boring. So they have their staff read them and advise whether they should vote for it or not.
Meanwhile, while the interns are reading bills they can't possibly comprehend, Congress goes out and does what's truly important to them. During campaign years this would be campaigning. During off years, this would be networking, schmoozing, raising funds, trading political favors, vying for powerful committees, securing job perks, giving themselves raises and lifetime benefits, and exempting themselves from laws such as insider trading and Obamacare.
Frankly, Congress often doesn't write bills or even bother to read them.
The special interests write the bills, which is explained away because the special interests have the "needed expertise in their field." The special interests, which is everything really, then of course writes whatever the hell they favor.
Congress doesn't read the bills written by the special interests because they are too long, complicated, and boring. So they have their staff read them and advise whether they should vote for it or not.
Meanwhile, while the interns are reading bills they can't possibly comprehend, Congress goes out and does what's truly important to them. During campaign years this would be campaigning. During off years, this would be networking, schmoozing, raising funds, trading political favors, vying for powerful committees, securing job perks, giving themselves raises and lifetime benefits, and exempting themselves from laws such as insider trading and Obamacare.
Doubtful. It won't get past the House especially without significant WH support. I am having trouble understanding the ineptitude of this draft unless they are looking for it to trigger something else....
MOD NOTE: let's try to discuss without resorting to words that should get **** out.
B
B
We interrupt this most satisfying session of barking at the moon for a question: is it even remotely possible that the Senior Senator from California did not consult with the technology companies domiciled in her home state, the ones that pay for her reelection campaigns, on the language of this bill? Anybody who says yes is in serious need of a remedial lesson in how government really, actually works.
Don't be so naive. Of course they understand the purpose of encryption. That is why they want to ban it just like governments around the world are trying to ban paper money.
Nobody wants a backdoor in iOS or suffer mad decryptions laws, not in any other operating system. And I agree, to some extent, but without any help from companies like Apple, we can't blame, say the FBI and NSA, for not doing enough/anything when another bomb goes off somewhere on this planet and one or more family members are lost.
So to what extent is your personal freedom and privacy more important than fighting criminals and terrorists? Saying no to everything doesn't help so what would be expectable to you?
So to what extent is your personal freedom and privacy more important than fighting criminals and terrorists? Saying no to everything doesn't help so what would be expectable to you?
Last edited:
You mean like Apple? But then again Feinstein was on the record in Feb that Apple should cooperate with the FBI, so there is that.
http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Feinstein-says-Apple-is-wrong-to-refuse-to-6843414.php
The bill seems toothless. It doesn't require companies to create a backdoor, and it doesn't prevent companies from designing systems where they can't access the data. So Apple's current direction, to make iPhone data inaccessible, even to Apple, without knowing the user's passcode is fine.
Also, Apple is trying to get the same privacy on iCloud data. They would host the data, but only the customer's device, properly unlocked, would be able to read that data. This is fine according to the bill.
Under the bill the FBI could compel Apple to help them try to unlock an iPhone, but if Apple doesn't have the ability to unlock a newer iPhone (without knowing the user's passcode), the only assistance they could give would be to say "Sorry, we don't know how."
It would require Apple to unlock an iPhone 5C, since there is a way they could do it. But Apple could challenge the law (if it becomes a law; for now it's just a bill, yes it's only a bill, and not even a bill, since it's really just a draft) in court, just as they could challenge a lower court order. We still would need a ruling from the Supreme Court.
Also, Apple is trying to get the same privacy on iCloud data. They would host the data, but only the customer's device, properly unlocked, would be able to read that data. This is fine according to the bill.
Under the bill the FBI could compel Apple to help them try to unlock an iPhone, but if Apple doesn't have the ability to unlock a newer iPhone (without knowing the user's passcode), the only assistance they could give would be to say "Sorry, we don't know how."
It would require Apple to unlock an iPhone 5C, since there is a way they could do it. But Apple could challenge the law (if it becomes a law; for now it's just a bill, yes it's only a bill, and not even a bill, since it's really just a draft) in court, just as they could challenge a lower court order. We still would need a ruling from the Supreme Court.
It's a draft bill everyone. You can stop calling for revolution. Obviously the bill is poorly written and shouldn't be given consideration, but let's keep our sanity. After all, Apple is the one who argued these security issues should be handled in Congress.
What I meant was burner flip phones. lol.. Use, then throw away. lmao...?
Call records... text messages... GPS history if the flip-phone has it (or cell tower proximity if it doesn't)... they've always been able to access that through the carrier.
What's being attempted here is applying the ease of obtaining info about flip-phone users to the encrypted data of smartphones (and computers... and tablets...)
The FBI must've felt multi-orgasmic when Windows 10 came out, it's almost as if they were the ones who coded Windows 10, or at the very least heavily consulted...
NO government. We are not clamoring for this authority to be granted to you. We are not up in arms demanding this be implemented. Against the will of the people you are attempting to exploit every opportunity to expand your power and authority. I will fight this and fight all the people like you in authority who try to push the government first mentality instead of putting the citizens first. No one is above the law. . . That is comical coming from a politician. Unethical applications of law or twisting of laws to fit situations they can't logically be applied to is a situation where every citizen should say to heck with with the law, it doesn't apply here. Your kind though seek to use those as whips to beat citizens and corporations into submission with. We will remember you authored these bills when it comes to election day.
Her power base does not include that sector of Cali. She has been backed predominately by Defense, Education, and Entertainment. Some Cable too. You can also add the occasional banking group.
[doublepost=1460150888][/doublepost]
Those are likely getting some new rules too.
Excellent news. Sadly I think this first Bill won't pass as Obama is too concerned about his "legacy" but its coming. Its totally unacceptable for tech companies to be unable to unecrypt content. Make no mistake their stance is nit about privacy its about avoiding responcibility - if we can't see it we can't be responsible for moderating it
[doublepost=1460150962][/doublepost]
We all lived without encryption before
[doublepost=1460150962][/doublepost]
So no email, no bank account etc etc
We all lived without encryption before