The main ones fighting publicly on such matters with little logic, ironically are the ones who end up getting caught because their fight is really a deflection from their true nature.
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.
U.S. Senators Threaten Apple and Facebook With Encryption Regulation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yo' Senators. Law enforcement can gain access to encrypted data from Facebook and Apple. It's call getting a warrant. There's something called the 4th Amendment.
Privacy and not being spied on tend to unite everybody. It's one of those universal, sanctimonious things that everyone agrees on (or at least they should anyway..)And I think we finally have a thread that everyone will agree on and not bash Apple and Tim Cook.
Like everyone agrees murder, pedophilia, rape, genocide, etc are all terrible no matter who you are.
A backdoor for law enforcement is never just a backdoor for law enforcement. It's purposefully poking holes in your security. No Lindsey Graham, no amount of emotional appeals that involve bringing up child abuse is going to change that.
Maybe they should publish all of their texts if they want to be able to see all of ours?
I mean, yeah, anyone has the means to poorly encrypt a device, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to deploy that solution on hundreds of millions of devices used far more often solely for legal and mundane tasks that need encryption (web browsing, shopping, banking, for example) than for clandestine and illegal ones (like child exploitation and terrorism).
I never agree much with the words of Antonin Scalia, but he hit the nail on the head in a 1987 case (Arizona v. Hicks), long before the rise of this “very difficult subject,” saying that “the Constitution sometimes insulates the criminality of a few in order to protect the privacy of us all.”
It’s a tough revelation because basically no one likes child exploitation and terrorism — both of these things, and similar activities in that vein, obviously need to be stopped as early as possible, ideally prevented altogether. But law enforcement already has the tools available to stop these things; they have sting operations, informants, undercover agents, and so on. All of these tools can be immensely relevant in catching and/or preventing even the most heinous crimes, but here they’re really just looking for an easy way out.
They’re saying, “break everyone’s encryption and we’ll only use it for the worst of the worst. We promise.”
Do you trust them?
And even if you’re naive and/or insane enough to trust the U.S. and UK governments with that kind of access, what about a government that actively seeks to oppress its people making that same request? Because once Apple creates a universal private/public key pair for “one time” decryption, it will lead to a mad dash all over the world for governments to gain access to that key pair and for malicious actors to try to compromise it. Then, it’d be open season — every iOS device in the world with effectively no encryption. That’s as high-value as a target can get.
So, I’ll ask again: Do you trust them?
You know you've hit the straw man section of the argument when the "do it for the children" line starts coming out.
If this comes to be, I hope Lindsey Graham is the first one who's data is hacked and released.
It is, but one fundamental thing about privacy is trust, which requires openness. The systems Apple uses for its encryption need to be open for all to see so that we can trust them. Theatrics of push-back against the government do not equate to assurances that privacy is real. Just saying.
It was only a few years ago that nobody had the tech to easily send or receive encrypted messages. What we have today (encryption of messages) is clearly an experiment that won't stand the test of time.
The world ran just fine before the invention of the smartphone.
The world ran just fine before the invention of the smartphone.
Here is the problem, if the goverment regulates something that forces Apple, FB and other legitimate companies to install backdoors, even the average law abiding citizen will start turning to other apps that aren't controlled by the government and it will make them prominent to a degree that it will make it harder for law enforcement to get the information they are trying to seek rather than easier.
This is exactly what happens when software companies make it too hard to register their software from those who have legitimately purchased it, they actually end up encouraging the piracy they are attempting to stop.
This is exactly what happens when software companies make it too hard to register their software from those who have legitimately purchased it, they actually end up encouraging the piracy they are attempting to stop.
Oh I was just pointing out how they’re typically against regulation, especially when their corporate sponsors want them to be against regulation. I wonder if Apple and Facebook just aren’t paying up enough?
if there is a backdoor into private conversations then governments will abuse it. The UK government has invoked anti-terrorist legislation to hold people in custody for more than the usual permitted time, despite there being no question that their crime did not involved terrorism.
And if anyone wants secure comma, they’ll just use PGP or some other process.
At some point in time the only encryption was the government. Encryption will stand the test of time, encryption without backwoods won’t.
that utopia - please show me one government in the whole world where government can be trusted.
People in power abuse it. History has enough cases to prove that. Also tons of movies/documentaries to prove that too. And we don't even need to go too far. Thats the sad reality.
Some years back, TSA allowed luggage manufacturers to make locks with a "backdoor" key so travelers could check their bags locked, yet TSA could open as needed.
Wired Magazine researched for an article about it, and published a photo of the master keys.
Within 3 hours of photo's release, there were unauthorized master keys for sale online.
NEVER consent to "backdoor" security.
(Disclosure: I write security apps for a major corporation with large user base.)
Wired Magazine researched for an article about it, and published a photo of the master keys.
Within 3 hours of photo's release, there were unauthorized master keys for sale online.
NEVER consent to "backdoor" security.
(Disclosure: I write security apps for a major corporation with large user base.)
While it was more of a scare/political tactic, with messages being encrypted, I would assume people can discuss with other people you can go to XYZ at 8pm to facilitate in some sordid and illegal meetups and/or trading evidence of said abuse in a way where evidence can't be eavesdropped on. Normally a wiretap can be done and eavesdropping can be done. The police will just need to do proper investigating and perhaps somehow go undercover like they do in real life. Somehow join these groups to collect evidence.
While Graham just threw out the worst possible case and I am sure there are some that do in fact use encrypted services to hide from the law, and I get it, protecting children is paramount in society, but when it comes down to it, eroding everyone's freedoms, including criminals right to privacy, would lead to a society that is far worse.
I am curious about someone if anyone here knows a lot about encryption. Can one attach an external device that is encrypted to encrypt all data entering and leaving app from that external USB device? Say then one downloaded what ever app they wanted but instead of to internal smartphone part rather to externally encrypted USB device
If US Senators do their jobs to protect our privacy instead of lining their pockets they might actually understand why there cannot be a backdoor.
There is no need to debate this at all.
RSA is based on prime numbers. It was invented in 1977 but British Intelligence came up with something similar in 1973 but declassified in 1997.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_algorithm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_(cryptosystem)
The bottom line is that it's an easy to implement system that you don't need to understand the underlying math to implement.
It's difficult to crack just because finding prime numbers is difficult.
RSA can be implemented in less than half a page of Python code.
A 2048 bit key would take approximately the energy to boil an ocean to break.
So here we are. We can implement unbreakable encryption in less than a page of Python.
I'd say the cat is out of the bag and we are done with the argument.
What is the senate screaming about?
[automerge]1576017908[/automerge]
Yep.
Anyone serious about encrypted messages is using open standards, like email+PGP, not a closed source app like iMessage, aka a black box you have no control over.
Provided that app writes data out to either a Lightning connector or USB port of a cellphone.
It's easier on an Android phone because with USB OTG it can treat an external device like local storage and can read the file system.
So to answer your question, yes.
[automerge]1576018562[/automerge]
I was looking at the article trying to find out which senator.
Turns out it is that flip-flop. 🤨
Turns out it is that flip-flop. 🤨