229
linuxxx
1y

Another attempt at trying to get support for weakening encryption recently.

An FBI spokesperson said something like 'we can put people on the moon, why can't we just create law enforcement-accessible encryption? i just don't buy it."

Fuck off and die.

Comments
  • 40
    An FBI agent pushing for a police state?

    Who woulda thought?
  • 17
    Well although that sentence is stupid as fuck and I totally love to keep my data secure, I can partially understand the law enforcements wish to read some people’s communications
  • 20
    @Root I would but the arguments they're using are starting to become more and more ridiculous. Worst part? Loads of people are fucking buying it.
  • 18
    @needToRoll I can too but backdoored encryption algo's?

    Fuck no.
  • 44
    "You don't know enough math to put people on the moon, so stop pretending you know enough math to talk about encryption."
  • 3
    @linuxxx agreed!
    That’s what I meant by the statements stupidity.

    The approach could not be any worst.
  • 16
    @needToRoll I'd love to read my boss's messages, too, because I totally think he's playing me, but that's no different than rifling through someone's desk.

    Also: with the sheer number of laws covering such a myriad number of bizarre things, every single person in the country is guilty of a felony, or at the very least a misdemeanor -- and ignorance of the law is no excuse. If law enforcement had access to everyone's digital life, anyone they wanted to be in jail would be in jail.

    It would be the ultimate political weapon.

    and you know the government -- all governments -- are corrupt enough to use it.
  • 14
    Not that other countries are too much better these days, but there's always been a bit of an anti-intellectual streak in US culture. Now it seems to be really taking over and there are a lot of "common sense" policies being made that are a really, really bad idea. It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that encryption with backdoors that law enforcement can use is encryption with backdoors that potentially anyone could use. But even that much rational thought seems to get labelled as "ivory tower liberal elitism".
  • 7
    @Root you misunderstood me!
    Just to make things perfectly clear.

    - I am against governmental control on the internet.
    - I am against law enforced „weak encryption“

    My comment was driven by my knowledge about a case where encryption became a serious for law enforcement.

    For me this should not used as an argument for wakening encryption’s but it just generated some sort of understanding...

    But for me there is no solution in sight where privacy can be granted and the law enforcement can be granted the tools they might need.

    And as long as this balance can not be guaranteed, I will be against all the laws targeting this area.
  • 1
    @Root also in the case I was talking about convicted criminals and that’s something a bit different from you searching your bosses desk
  • 3
    @needToRoll Good to know! 😊
  • 1
    @needToRoll The FBI in no way wants to limit their use of encryption backdoors to convicted criminals. Anyway do you mean people currently imprisoned or people who've served their time? They can already control the former and the latter have privacy rights too...
  • 2
    This again?! 🤦‍♂️
  • 6
    'Accesible encryption' doesn't even make any sense.
    It just breaks encryption so fuck that.
  • 0
    Guess they forgot about Dual_EC_DRBG
  • 7
    How would they even prevent people from using encryption? By making math illegal?
  • 4
    If there is a backdoor for police....
    There’s a backdoor for everyone with a few hours
  • 3
    This FBI dude should be asked how on earth they would save their almighty encryption circumvention access from getting stolen.
    Or: What happened if some FBI dude abused it for his own profit?
    Or: What's the purpose of encryption, if it can't protect the content from everyone you want to keep out.
    Or: Would he bring a copy of all his keys to the police?
    Or: How would he feel if somebody stole his key copies at the police office but nobody told him about it for a month?
  • 4
    What bothers me the most: Why the fuck would you seriously want to create a unifuckingversal backdoor and not think about what the implications are if this very fucking backdoor gets public/stolen?
    How can they be so ignorant and think anybody/any agency could handle such a massive responsibility?
  • 3
    This thread gives me a strong desire to create a website listing all these good reasons and arguments for digital privacy reasons. Maybe have a quiz based on @Root’s comment about everyone having committed a felony to show people just how far that goes.

    @Linuxxx May be best to run it but I could probably do it as well. Anyone want to start a collab?
  • 2
    @Root Hear, hear!
  • 0
    They should rot.
  • 0
    @A-C-E yeah I’m game. I’m good for servers and basic programming logic, with absolutely 0 front end experience. But you’ll have a let’s encrypt cert and bulletproof dns from day 1?
  • 1
    @Diactoros Hope so. Definitely SSL. That’s partly why I was pinging @Linuxxx about it since he has set up some websites before and probably knows a lot more about security than me, however I figure it is still a long shot since he has his own life and all that and probably doesn’t have time for random people pinging him with projects

    it honestly wouldn’t be that hard, I have enough full stack experience where I could make it work, I just don’t have time. I’m writing it down though
  • 1
    ....I just realized that this is a linuxxx rant to begin with...

    Good job me
  • 2
    Quite simple... what's the use of encryption if it has a backdoor? Nada.
  • 3
    "If we can put people of the moon, why can't we just put people on the sun. I just don't buy that"
  • 1
    @whoneedsgit Well DUH, I mean the sun is so much bigger so it should be an easier target to hit.
Add Comment