●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop
Forgot your password?
Close
wnewsdaystalestupid
sightfulinterestingmaybe
cflamebaittrollredundantoverrated
vefunnyunderrated
podupeerror
×
82116321
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @10:35PM
(#51705653)
Attached to: Obama: Government Can't Let Smartphones Be 'Black Boxes'
I don't understand your response. Why is the balance of risk from government vs risk from bad actors changed by whether I know about encryption?
Firstly, widely available, unbreakable encryption is a new thing (especially when you consider ciphers considered strong even 5 years ago are now breakable).
Any new thing has the power to disrupt the status quo (resulting in possible net gains or losses for all of us).
Like every other major disruption in history, it has to be controlled to ensure the good outweighs the bad (eg cars, planes, computers, medicine, guns, whatever... all have some level of control to ensure they provide a net benefit to society)
So with this new thing you have to ask, do I prefer the option of uncontrolled technology and the possible risks, or do I prefer some level of control to try and ensure a net gain for me, my family, and maybe society too?
And ultimately you have to trust someone. And I trust the criminal gangs slightly less than the democratically elected government variety.
The implication is simply that encryption ought to be ubiquitous and easy to use if it is to be effective. That's kind of where the tech industry has been pushing.
.
Yes and the tech industry, just like any other (auto, tobacco, food, drug etc) don't always have your best interests at heart, as proven by history.
Who exactly is it that you think is more at risk from a terrorist than someone stealing their data? A grandma?! Surely you yourself don't actually believe that.
Encryption won't save granny from data thieves, we know this because the bad guys simply ring up and pretend to be Bill Gates and she hands over the keys.
But we also know that wide-spread uncrackable encryption will lead to less convictions as savvy crims learn how to hide their tracks better. Less convictions mean more crims on the streets, and more crime. This is not an acceptable outcome either.
That will require either holding that code permanently (a major security risk) or re-making it continuously (a huge waste of time and effort for some of the company's most critical engineers, and still no real mitigation of the security risk, as those engineers will over time inevitably learn the methods required to develop the software from all the repetition and thus be susceptible to compromise by bad actors).
They aren't the only options, and I'm surprised that this being a tech forum it's the only ones we keep getting hammered with.
Anyway, enough of this. Why don't you explain what you're proposing? Is it:
I'm not offering solutions, I'm asking for them. We are techies, first we must accept that uncontrolled cryptography presents a real risk to our rule of law (ie convictions mostly hinge on information gathering, cryptography has the potential to disrupt this massively), then we try and come up with solutions. I think this is all our politicians are trying to say.
However since you asked I will offer some ideas (I'm no expert so feel free to offer constructive criticism).
One option I see is restricting types of encryption allowed to be used. An independent technology forum could establish what is considered 'adequate' levels of public cryptography. The public are free to use this, and it is strong enough to protect against casual attack, but still able to be brute forced by Govt level processing power. Sure the real bad guys still exist, but most laws aren't designed to get everyone. Stopping the casual threats is a large part of most law enforcement strategy.
Another possibility is an independent key store accessible only by the courts. Using HSM type technology you can lock down private keys to only be accessible by certain parties with certain approval. A bit like how nuke keys are handled. With enough procedure this could be secured as much as anyone could expect.
Another option is some sort of rolling key that expires, ie a key that lasts say 3 years, and if you don't renew it, the key becomes public or something. So any casual data can be protected, and if not under investigation kept secure, while crucial evidence can be exposed after key expiry.
I'm sure there are holes in these, but as I said I'm no expert. But I'm sure there are people out there who are who can think of a system more useful than just 'backdoor' or 'no encryption'. The point I'm making (and I think our administrators are asking for) is that we should at least try and come up with a some sort of viable solution to deal with the very real risk that is widely available unbreakable encryption.
82115825
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @09:54PM
(#51705501)
Attached to: Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign'
I have never voted for an incumbent in any election, and I ALWAYS vote. I want to get rid of the a**holes, not bring them back so they can continue screwing up.
So you want your vote to count more than others? I think they've tried that system before and it failed...
82115805
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @09:52PM
(#51705493)
Attached to: Hotel Experience With Android Lightswitches
I don't know whey you are stealing clothes when you could have laptops, iPads and jewelry.
Have you ever stayed in a hotel? Most people will have their valuables on them, or if left in the room kept in a safe. I hardly think that renting a hotel room, which you have to present ID and credit card (sure you could fake that but...) only so you can hack the electrical control bus to try and work out when another guest is not in (maybe), so you can somehow break down their door, and pray they have something valuable lying around you can steal (that doesn't have GPS and tracking), and hope there's no cameras or security (which there usually is), is the best idea I've heard of.
If you want to steal stuff, learn how to climb or abseil and come in through the window. It's a whole lot simpler.
82115709
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @09:43PM
(#51705465)
Attached to: Obama: Government Can't Let Smartphones Be 'Black Boxes'
I may have a hard time convincing *you*, but that's not the same as having a hard time convincing anyone.
No, but the fact still remains, your average Donald/Hillary voter doesn't even know what encryption is, and even if they did, don't know how to use it correctly which mean it's not 'essential'.
I don't see the relevance of recency.
Well it wasn't essential at some point not long ago (ie about 20 years ago when no-one used encryption (outside of specialist circles), so what has changed that now changes that fact?
but you may not buy a phone that has encryption that secures such data from bad actors", then that is giving up an essential liberty.
More than likely I'm guessing, some new rules will create a restriction of technology. Just like how you can own an AR15, but not a ICBM. Or you can drive a Lamborghini on a public road but not an Indy car. Cryptography will be defined by some standards in which 'adequate' protection will be publicly available, and the high end will be restricted. It will become an offence to use higher end encryption without appropriate authority.
This concept is not new, and for something that has the potential impact on law enforcement as cryptography, it's hard to see how doing nothing is ever going to be an acceptable option.
82098061
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @07:26AM
(#51699243)
Attached to: Hotel Experience With Android Lightswitches
Nothing like being able to know a room will have belongings but is unoccupied to make the burglar's work easy.
Because risking jail for stealing tourist's clothes is worth it for your average IT savvy crook....
82097971
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @07:23AM
(#51699231)
Attached to: Hotel Experience With Android Lightswitches
No, they should win salesman of the year. The shaming should go to whoever at the hotel didn't do due diligence, and bought the system.
Same goes for whoever is approving those smart elevator controls, you know the ones where the lift has no buttons, you type in your floor on a panel in the lobby, then get assigned a lift number? They are becoming more and more common and I always have a worse experience with them than the old fashioned up and down buttons with floor buttons in each lift.
82097831
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @07:19AM
(#51699205)
Attached to: Hotel Experience With Android Lightswitches
Also, most people don't just carry around random credit card-sized cards that they're willing to leave behind for a little added convenience.
Are you sure about that? Every wallet or purse I've ever peaked into is full of pointless shit, mostly credit card sized. And every holiday I've ever been on we've always had a spare card to jam in the socket.
82097441
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @07:05AM
(#51699153)
Attached to: Why Do We Work So Hard?
I think it's all down to the protestant work ethic that's been drilled into the minds of all westerners for generations. "Work hard in this life, and you shall receive your just rewards in the next life" and so on.
Dude, I think this way of thinking has been around a lot longer than 16th century...
82095961
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @06:08AM
(#51698979)
Attached to: Hacker GhostShell Doxes Himself So He Could Get a Job In the Industry
I think you've been watching too many movies...
82088695
comment
byJack Griffin
5, 2016 @12:50AM
(#51698307)
Attached to: Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign'
Most Americans don't interfere in the business of any country.
I've been a U.S. citizen for my entire life of almost 50 years, and no President has ever asked my opinion before he acted like the world's biggest bully.
He asks for your opinion every 4 years...
82085583
comment
byJack Griffin
2016 @09:27PM
(#51697705)
Attached to: Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign'
And destroyed their country.
I take it you haven't been to Germany lately? Or had any experience in Engineering? Or understand the political power balance in Europe right now?
82085535
comment
byJack Griffin
2016 @09:22PM
(#51697687)
Attached to: Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign'
My favourite trump moments:
- Announcing that not only will he build a wall along the border, but he'll make Mexico pay for it.
This has been my single favourite moment so far. I'm still waiting to hear how this will address the planes, tunnels and submarines that currently also being used by smugglers?
82085479
comment
byJack Griffin
2016 @09:18PM
(#51697677)
Attached to: Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign'
This is how I feel as well.
It is eerie how similar the Trump rise to the head of the ticket is to the Obama rise.
What the racism, fascism, division and inciting of hatred and violence? Eerie....
82085425
comment
byJack Griffin
2016 @09:14PM
(#51697663)
Attached to: Obama: Government Can't Let Smartphones Be 'Black Boxes'
any criminals that care about it at all, ALREADY HAVE completely secure data & communications.
No true Scotsman?
ever heard of PGP? full-disk encryption?
no, this is all about gaining access to the low hanging fruit. which in the vast majority of cases means joe taxpayer.
PGP and FDE were available in 9/11 but not common or easy enough for that level of criminal. Yet only 15 years later kids and grandmothers get FDE by default now.
It would be dishonest to imply that there isn't a trend there. And that trend will continue to have implications. I'd still like to hear what approaches anyone thinks can be done to address this new threat.
82055593
comment
byJack Griffin
2016 @09:58PM
(#51691743)
Attached to: Obama: Government Can't Let Smartphones Be 'Black Boxes'
Itisa black box, you and I cannot see into the deepest inner workings, and voting out those inner workings is nigh impossible.
Speak for yourself. I've done a number of projects for Govt Depts and local, state and federal level. Most of what I worked on I fully understood how it worked.
I don't like to sound defeatist, but our government is unchangeable in the short and medium term. I think effective change will take a century from now.
Only because you don't really understand how a government as large as the US works. It's specifically designed not to change quickly, quick changes introduce unacceptable risk to the nation as a whole, and the government is there to reduce risk on the people. Democracies are designed for stability over dynamics. If you want dynamic go see how that is working out in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
« Newer
Older »
Slashdot Top Deals
●(email not shown publicly)
●
Got a Score:5 Comment
●
Comedian
●
Days Read in a Row
●
Re:One phone to rule them all
●
Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous
●
Re:Screw control, monitoring more interesting...
●
Re:One phone to rule them all
●
Re:Screw control, monitoring more interesting...
●
binspam (submissions)
●
stupid (submissions)
Slashdot
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...