No the company “shall not be forced into indentured service”, they espouse a free market system then they should live or die by it. When a court issues a search warrant or wiretap order to collect evidence of crime, the company should be able to help. So we get the “You shall be our slaves and vassals” quip, But it is up to civil society to resist this, so that human rights are supported in addition to criminal law. In the end, the fact is that law enforcement is always supportive of police state policies, since it makes their jobs that much easier. This has resulted in the unfortunate consequences of law enforcement being required do actual police investigations which require far more effort and resources then beating confessions out of suspects.Ĭomputers are tools for our brains, so police also want means to be able to get info from there too, regardless of privacy and other human rights. But now anti-torture policies are resulting in a going-dark problem for law enforcement, as we can no longer easily get confessions out of suspects’ encrypted brains. ![]() In the past we were able to beat confessions out of suspects to overcome this. Quote: The human brain imposes a high degree of complexity, effectively encrypting any information it stores. Tags: cloud computing, crypto wars, cryptography, encryption, FBI, police, vulnerabilitiesįBI henchmen are also complaining about the going dark problem. This is something we pointed out in our 2016 paper: “ Don’t Panic.” But forcing companies to build an alternate means to access the plaintext that the user can’t control is an enormous vulnerability. Rosenstein is right that many services like Gmail naturally keep plaintext in the cloud. The government does not need to hold the key. The question is whether to require a particular goal: When a court issues a search warrant or wiretap order to collect evidence of crime, the company should be able to help. The government does not need to micromanage the engineering. I do not believe that the government should mandate a specific means of ensuring access. No one calls any of those functions a “backdoor.” In fact, those very capabilities are marketed and sought out. For example, there are systems that include central management of security keys and operating system updates scanning of content, like your e-mails, for advertising purposes simulcast of messages to multiple destinations at once and key recovery when a user forgets the password to decrypt a laptop. We know encryption can include safeguards. Responsible encryption is effective secure encryption, coupled with access capabilities. I simply maintain that companies should retain the capability to provide the government unencrypted copies of communications and data stored on devices, when a court orders them to do so. I support strong and responsible encryption. It is critical to the growth and flourishing of the digital economy, and we support it. ![]() It is a foundational element of data security and essential to safeguarding data against cyber-attacks. Although encryption can help secure your data, it may also prevent law enforcement agencies from protecting your data.Įncryption serves a valuable purpose. I encourage you to carefully consider your company’s interests and how you can work cooperatively with us. Our ability to secure systems and prosecute criminals depends on our ability to gather evidence. If we cannot access data even with lawful process, we are unable to do our job. The problem is especially critical because electronic evidence is necessary for both the investigation of a cyber incident and the prosecution of the perpetrator. ![]() The prevent the police from reading those messages, even if an impartial judge approves their interception. For example, many instant-messaging services now encrypt messages by default. Law enforcement can also partner with private industry to address a problem we call “Going Dark.” Technology increasingly frustrates traditional law enforcement efforts to collect evidence needed to protect public safety and solve crime. ![]() In a recent talk, his idea is that tech companies just save a copy of the plaintext: Yet Another FBI Proposal for Insecure Communicationsĭeputy Attorney General Rosenstein has given talks where he proposes that tech companies decrease their communications and device security for the benefit of the FBI.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |