Haha oh wow they aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
"Stop encrypting your stuff because we wanna read it."
[QUOTE=catbarf;46122013]what on earth would lead anyone to believe that a rudimentary piece of encryption would be a challenge for the most technically capable agencies in the world? [/QUOTE]
Mathematics
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;46126365]Haha oh wow they aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
"Stop encrypting your stuff because we wanna read it."[/QUOTE]
[i]Come on, guys! The FBI are hard at work! Give them a break! [sp]The least you could do is let them view your dick pics.[/sp][/i]
[QUOTE=NightmareX91;46126723][I]Come on, guys! The FBI are hard at work! Give them a break! [sp]The least you could do is let them view your dick pics.[/sp][/I][/QUOTE]
The worst part is just how apathetic people have become. Back when the Patriot Act was a big thing the general public threw a hissy fit at the very idea someone's listening to their phone conversations.
Then, years later those documents showing a massive surveillance program got released. Besides an uproar from the international community over the US spying on allies/foreign citizens, the American public didn't give a shit.
I'm encrypting my phone now, and the only reason is everyone is trying to tell me not to.
Must be important.
---
[QUOTE=catbarf;46121899]You don't complain about 'guilty till proven innocent' when law enforcement gets a warrant to search a home.[/QUOTE]
You have absolutely no idea how the legal system works do you
[QUOTE=Paramud;46127589]You have absolutely no idea how the legal system works do you[/QUOTE]
No, after working with law enforcement I'm sure I don't. Please, enlighten me as to how getting a legal warrant to search for evidence after filing a justification to a court is acceptable when it's a house but 'OMG GUILTY BEFORE INNOCENT' when it's a phone.
[QUOTE=catbarf;46127610]No, after working with law enforcement I'm sure I don't. Please, enlighten me as to how getting a legal warrant to search for evidence after filing a justification to a court is acceptable when it's a house but 'OMG GUILTY BEFORE INNOCENT' when it's a phone.[/QUOTE]
Because a legal warrant is legal and unwarranted phone tapping without consent is a violation of a person's constitutional rights.
[editline]oh hamburgers[/editline]
By the way, your alleged former employment in law enforcement doesn't mean you know more about it than anyone else so you should probably hang up the medals, war hero, because you're not going to get any points for them.
[QUOTE=Paramud;46127633]Because a legal warrant is legal and unwarranted phone tapping without consent is a violation of a person's constitutional rights.[/QUOTE]
And... what does that have to do with anything? Where did anyone say unwarranted phone tapping without consent is okay?
[editline]2nd October 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Paramud;46127633]By the way, your alleged former employment in law enforcement doesn't mean you know more about it than anyone else so you should probably hang up the medals, war hero, because you're not going to get any points for them.[/QUOTE]
lol okay
never said I worked [I]for[/I] law enforcement but [i]sick burn[/i], wanna comment on something relevant to the thread now?
[QUOTE=catbarf;46122013]Anyone who thinks that encrypting their phone will stop them is kidding themselves. You've seen the stories, you've read about their capabilities, you know what they've done in the past- what on earth would lead anyone to believe that a [b]rudimentary piece of encryption[/b] would be a challenge for the most technically capable agencies in the world?[/QUOTE]
The bolded part stands out, really.
Unless they've got some kind of secret quantum computer or something similarly weird, there's no conceivable way for them to break some of that encryption. They may find ways around it, like if they've already got enough of their own listeners in the system to catch the data before it gets encrypted or something, but they're not breaking good encryption without a tremendous amount of luck. That "rudimentary piece of encryption" is backed up by some "rudimentary math" which says that you won't get past it by guessing until the sun has burnt out, if not longer.
Of course, they could just [url=http://xkcd.com/538/]tie you to a chair and beat you with a lead pipe until you give up your key[/url].
[QUOTE=catbarf;46127699]And... what does that have to do with anything? Where did anyone say unwarranted phone tapping without consent is okay?[/QUOTE]
Sorry, misread your post and thought you were talking about unwarranted phone tapping. Phone tapping with a warrant is fine because it's done [b]legally[/b].
[QUOTE=catbarf;46127699]never said I worked [I]for[/I] law enforcement but [i]sick burn[/i][/QUOTE]
Your original attempt to sound experienced carries even less weight now.
[QUOTE=froztshock;46127777]The bolded part stands out, really.
Unless they've got some kind of secret quantum computer or something similarly weird, there's no conceivable way for them to break some of that encryption. They may find ways around it, like if they've already got enough of their own listeners in the system to catch the data before it gets encrypted or something, but they're not breaking good encryption without a tremendous amount of luck. That "rudimentary piece of encryption" is backed up by some "rudimentary math" which says that you won't get past it by guessing until the sun has burnt out, if not longer.[/QUOTE]
Yes, now think about it for a second: Do you really think that an agency like the NSA, that makes a business of breaking into other countries' computer systems, that routinely monitors communications all across the world, that hires hackers and security specialists, that has influence in everything from encryption software to router hardware, is going to be stopped in its tracks by commercial encryption put out by Apple?
There are a million and one ways that a technologically savvy agency unconcerned with privacy and with backdoors in all sorts of commercial software can get around it, but it [I]will[/I] stop ordinary police. It won't stop the government from snooping at your device without a warrant, but it will stop police from uncovering potentially critical evidence even with a warrant. There's nothing they can do to stop people from using it, there's nothing illegal about the technology, but rendering phones essentially inaccessible even for entirely legal, justified searches is going to have repercussions for law enforcement.
It's not some trite, inane matter like police being mad that they can't spy on everyone all the time without warrants, it's a very practical concern that this societal shift is going to make it harder for them to do their job no matter how much legal justification they have.
[QUOTE=catbarf;46128148]Yes, now think about it for a second: Do you really think that an agency like the NSA, that makes a business of breaking into other countries' computer systems, that routinely monitors communications all across the world, that hires former hackers and security specialists, that has influence in everything from encryption software to router hardware, is going to be stopped in its tracks by commercial encryption put out by Apple?[/QUOTE]
Yes, I've covered this.
[quote] They may find ways around it, like if they've already got enough of their own listeners in the system to catch the data before it gets encrypted or something.[/quote]
[QUOTE=catbarf;46128148]There are a million and one ways that a technologically savvy agency unconcerned with privacy can get around it, but it [i]will[/i] stop ordinary police. It won't stop the government from snooping at your device without a warrant, but it will stop police from uncovering potentially critical evidence even with a warrant. There's nothing they can really do to stop people from using it, there's nothing illegal about the technology, but rendering phones essentially inaccessible even for entirely legal, justified searches is going to have repercussions for law enforcement.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what to tell you about this though. Should we just say that people aren't allowed to encrypt their data? Classify encryption software as munitions? Ensure that all encryption software has some kind of backdoor which will let local law enforcement in? I understand where you're coming from, but it's unreasonable to expect people to give up strong encryption. It's a necessity for living in today's world. Hell I encrypt important personal information because that's the only real way to keep it safe.
[QUOTE=catbarf;46128148]Yes, now think about it for a second: Do you really think that an agency like the NSA, that makes a business of breaking into other countries' computer systems, that routinely monitors communications all across the world, that hires hackers and security specialists, that has influence in everything from encryption software to router hardware, is going to be stopped in its tracks by commercial encryption put out by Apple?
...[/QUOTE]
Considering the NSA and CIA use that same encrytion? Yeah, they probably will.
Breaking encryption is an entirely different matter to guessing the key, the issue isn't that these phones use "weak encryption" or whatever, it's that the keys supplied by most users are going to be really weak.
[QUOTE=froztshock;46128187] I'm not sure what to tell you about this though. Should we just say that people aren't allowed to encrypt their data? Classify encryption software as munitions? Ensure that all encryption software has some kind of backdoor which will let local law enforcement in? I understand where you're coming from, but it's unreasonable to expect people to give up strong encryption. It's a necessity for living in today's world. Hell I encrypt important personal information because that's the only real way to keep it safe.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. I totally agree that it's reasonable for people to use this software since it's widely available, especially with the ongoing concern over governmental intrusion into privacy. Historically, technology has worked both ways, sometimes making it easier for governments to overstep their bounds, sometimes giving people so much power that governments can't do their job. It's an unstable balance and it often swings one way or the other, and that's natural.
Maybe the government will push for legislation to further restrict encryption- right now, the law says that if the issuing body (in this case Apple) has the means to bypass it, then they must provide it if they're supplied a legitimate warrant. Obviously, they can get around that by not possessing the means, but I could see an agency like the FBI pushing for a law to obligate providers like Apple to have a way around the encryption. I don't see that as likely, but it could happen.
All I'm saying is that this will definitely make it harder for police to do their job, and that people dismissing it as just FBI whining that they can't spy on everyone anymore aren't thinking very hard. I suspect it will take a high profile case for people to really consider the ramifications.
The argument that the police can't do their job is moot anyway, the whole problem is that the police are using more and more resources to circomvent the law by searching siezed phones, tracking cars, and using stingers to capture everyone's data instead of persuing the legal channels which follow personal liberties and have already established clauses for situations where haste is needed. Encryption forces them to back off and go towards more legal routes because they don't have the time or expertise or legal power to get the keys to decrypt something.
[editline]2nd October 2014[/editline]
The whole point of the massive patriot act is that the agencies that should have access to the keys are supposed to keep them under wraps, however the way its turned out is that every tom dick and harry can cry to a few senators and get access for their agency, presinct, and beuro, so now everybody has access to everything and the citizens who entrusted the government to not fuck around with the stuff we give them access to are fucking around with it. I'm not fine with the NSA spy program but I understand why they do it, I am not fine with the local police having the same level of access as the NSA however because they aren't thwarting terrorism, they aren't hacking into or preventing hacks from foreign countries, they exist to protect and serve and the militarization of the police has been a side effect of their massive swelling of power
[QUOTE=froztshock;46128187]
I'm not sure what to tell you about this though. Should we just say that people aren't allowed to encrypt their data? [b]Classify encryption software as munitions?[/b] Ensure that all encryption software has some kind of backdoor which will let local law enforcement in? I understand where you're coming from, but it's unreasonable to expect people to give up strong encryption. It's a necessity for living in today's world. Hell I encrypt important personal information because that's the only real way to keep it safe.[/QUOTE]
They tried and failed, [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_investigation]see PGP's criminal investigation.[/url]
[QUOTE=glitchvid;46129754]They tried and failed, [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_investigation]see PGP's criminal investigation.[/url][/QUOTE]
Fun fact: US export laws make selling products to other countries using encryption with a strength greater than 512 bits require screening and prior approval.
Company I work at got caught out on that one because we used reasonable encyption+keys as default on everything.
[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;46122333]Did she stop all of the sudden and just goes "UMM YEAH LET ME HEAR YOU SAY THOSE WORDS
BOMB PRESIDENT"[/QUOTE]
say them 3 times or obama will appear at your bed with a knife and kill u~
[QUOTE=catbarf;46122013]Anyone who thinks that encrypting their phone will stop them is kidding themselves. You've seen the stories, you've read about their capabilities, you know what they've done in the past- what on earth would lead anyone to believe that a rudimentary piece of encryption would be a challenge for the most technically capable agencies in the world?[/QUOTE]
maybe if you took a course in data encryption you'd understand why algorithms like AES are so effective and why they cannot be cracked within a reasonable timeframe (bar some extremely bad implementation of it)
[QUOTE=DeEz;46130119]maybe if you took a course in data encryption you'd understand why algorithms like AES are so effective and why they cannot be cracked within a reasonable timeframe (bar some extremely bad implementation of it)[/QUOTE]
You don't even need to take a course, just do some googling around the subject, that's enough to tell you the basics.
[QUOTE=catbarf;46128257]
All I'm saying is that this will definitely make it harder for police to do their job, and that people dismissing it as just FBI whining that they can't spy on everyone anymore aren't thinking very hard. I suspect it will take a high profile case for people to really consider the ramifications.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how long you think it'll be before everything is routinely encrypted to a high level, just because it can be, but it's pretty much now. I'd be seriously surprised if terrorists don't start encrypting any incriminating data, seeing as the cartels already do it. You can't get away from that fact, so I don't know about you, but I'd rather law enforcement agencies devoted their efforts elsewhere - it's not like there aren't other new technologies that compensate for it.
I kind of get what you're saying about it making it harder for the police to catch normal criminals, but it really seems like that should rely on more traditional methods. Probably easier to coerce someone into giving up the key for some sort of plea bargin, or whatever.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
