4 ms·

> Are they also aware that the exact same technology is used to protect their online banking? To protect against attacks like the Sony hack? Do they know that t

by rodgerd 11y ago

> Are they also aware that the exact same technology is used to protect their online banking? To protect against attacks like the Sony hack? Do they know that there is a huge segment of the economy that relies on strong encryption to do business? I'm sure they are. The problem is, I suspect, more the delusion that if there are backdoors, only MURICA will be able to exploit them because GODDAMN GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! They would find the idea that there are talented individuals and groups, outside the US, who are capable of exploiting these facilities, absolutely incomprehensible. Moreover, the civil servants who they should be able to rely on to provide accurate information about why it doesn't work that way (e.g. the NSA) will be actively encouraging that ignorance for their own benefits.

91bananas 11y ago
Your statement is bleak, but probably so true that it's scary.
spin 11y ago
The movie companies and the record companies wanted DRM -- they were under the delusion that they could both control digital information while sharing digital information. So now Washington is suffering from a similar delusion: you can build encryption to keep criminals out of your banking website, but still allow the feds access to whatever they choose.
- daemin 11y ago
  So then if a federal agent is/becomes a criminal does that mean they won't be able to access the back door then?
  - takeda 11y ago
    You know the answer to this, but that's not the point. The old system did not prevent crooked agent to have access as well. The problem here is much bigger, because they assume that no one in the world (including foreign governments) would be able to figure out how to exploit backdoor(s). Imagine a foreign government eventually would discover it. Such knowledge would be extremely powerful weapon in cyber warfare. What McCain is suggesting is extremely dumb, even if he's not concerned about our privacy.
curun1r 11y ago
> The problem is, I suspect, more the delusion that if there are backdoors, only MURICA will be able to exploit them because GODDAMN GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! They would find the idea that there are talented individuals and groups, outside the US, who are capable of exploiting these facilities, absolutely incomprehensible. I don't think that's it at all. I think it's because they expect everything to work the way the phone system did. For a long time, tapping a phone was just a warrant away. And it really was significantly harder for anyone except the government to listen in on phone conversations. Now, the world has moved on from POTS to connections that allow arbitrary data to be sent instead of just sound. In that world, the control in the system shifts to the endpoints and away from the network. We (the kind that reads HN) understand why that has to be the case, but lawmakers and law enforcement are struggling with that paradigm shift. I see it as being very similar to the problems encountered by the record companies in the late 90s/early 00s. They were comfortable selling CDs and understood CD copying well enough to deal with what little piracy there was. But then Napster came along and showed that their product was just bits that could easily be transferred freely across the globe. We all understood this reality, but the industry spent the better part of a decade trying to make uncopyable bits (DRM) and to stamp out piracy in a torrent of lawsuits. At this point, they've mostly come to terms with the new reality and are adjusting. Government is going to need to come to terms with that same new reality and adjust.
- laaph 11y ago
  > And it really was significantly harder for anyone except the government to listen in on phone conversations. This is absolutely not true. Outside everyone's house was a box, and by hooking two wires there you could easily monitor phone calls. There was similar security every where else along the way. When wireless (not cellular) phones became common, you could get a scanner to listen them (I'm not sure they were legal to sell listening at that frequency but they were easily modified). The POTS was simply not secure at all.

by rodgerd 11y ago

91bananas 11y ago

Your statement is bleak, but probably so true that it's scary.

spin 11y ago

The movie companies and the record companies wanted DRM -- they were under the delusion that they could both control digital information while sharing digital information. So now Washington is suffering from a similar delusion: you can build encryption to keep criminals out of your banking website, but still allow the feds access to whatever they choose.

daemin 11y ago
So then if a federal agent is/becomes a criminal does that mean they won't be able to access the back door then?
- takeda 11y ago
  You know the answer to this, but that's not the point. The old system did not prevent crooked agent to have access as well. The problem here is much bigger, because they assume that no one in the world (including foreign governments) would be able to figure out how to exploit backdoor(s). Imagine a foreign government eventually would discover it. Such knowledge would be extremely powerful weapon in cyber warfare. What McCain is suggesting is extremely dumb, even if he's not concerned about our privacy.

curun1r 11y ago

> The problem is, I suspect, more the delusion that if there are backdoors, only MURICA will be able to exploit them because GODDAMN GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! They would find the idea that there are talented individuals and groups, outside the US, who are capable of exploiting these facilities, absolutely incomprehensible. I don't think that's it at all. I think it's because they expect everything to work the way the phone system did. For a long time, tapping a phone was just a warrant away. And it really was significantly harder for anyone except the government to listen in on phone conversations. Now, the world has moved on from POTS to connections that allow arbitrary data to be sent instead of just sound. In that world, the control in the system shifts to the endpoints and away from the network. We (the kind that reads HN) understand why that has to be the case, but lawmakers and law enforcement are struggling with that paradigm shift. I see it as being very similar to the problems encountered by the record companies in the late 90s/early 00s. They were comfortable selling CDs and understood CD copying well enough to deal with what little piracy there was. But then Napster came along and showed that their product was just bits that could easily be transferred freely across the globe. We all understood this reality, but the industry spent the better part of a decade trying to make uncopyable bits (DRM) and to stamp out piracy in a torrent of lawsuits. At this point, they've mostly come to terms with the new reality and are adjusting. Government is going to need to come to terms with that same new reality and adjust.

laaph 11y ago
> And it really was significantly harder for anyone except the government to listen in on phone conversations. This is absolutely not true. Outside everyone's house was a box, and by hooking two wires there you could easily monitor phone calls. There was similar security every where else along the way. When wireless (not cellular) phones became common, you could get a scanner to listen them (I'm not sure they were legal to sell listening at that frequency but they were easily modified). The POTS was simply not secure at all.