3 ms·

I know talking politics on this site is taboo, but this is a nice segue into a conversation about who is everyone voting for... There doesn't appear to be a ser

I know talking politics on this site is taboo, but this is a nice segue into a conversation about who is everyone voting for... There doesn't appear to be a serious contender on either side that isn't making ridiculous claims about the dangers of encryption. The audacity of Hilary Clinton last night, admitting she doesn't know a whole lot about encryption, but thinks for some reason that the tech community is on her side, because... ISIS? Is there anyone in tech that actually agrees with these people? I'm being serious, am I just shielded from that side of the conversation? Are there educated people, who understand encryption, that don't work for NSA, that think key escrow is a reasonable request? It leads me to the conclusion that policymakers are that out of touch with the world.

cowkingdeluxe 11y ago
You seem to have left the fact that Hillary Clinton also ruled out backdoors last night. That is quite a significant statement in my opinion.
- spinchange 11y ago
  She called for a Manhattan-like project to give law enforcement exceptional access without breaking encryption because "maybe the back door is not the right door." Hardly a ringing endorsement for privacy!
- kabdib 11y ago
  We hear a lot of things from candidates. But something seems to happen to frosh presidents that makes them go all squishy when it comes to screwing with the natsec apparatus, something more tangible than just the usual collection of forgotten campaign promises. Something more effective than a simple "Four Horsemen" briefing that the CIA/NSA/ETC dust off every fourth January. On the other hand, politicians are snakes and will say anything to get elected. So there's that.
  - marcoperaza 11y ago
    It's easy to sit behind a computer or on a debate stage and repeat trite aphorisms like "we can't trade our privacy for security". It's very different when you are personally responsible for the security of not only 300 million Americans, but of the entire world. When you get briefings every day about the activity of people and organizations who will do everything that they can to kill as many innocent people as possible.
- nickysielicki 11y ago
  That's political doublespeak. No one is going to sit up on a stage and say that they think "backdoors" are a good idea. But if you've been paying attention the past few months, when they're not on stage, both Hillary and Obama have been calling for key escrow. To think she's changed from that while still using the same exact statement of, "Silicon Valley geniuses are going to come around and be our Manhattan project" is wrong.
- fivre 11y ago
  Backdoors aside, I'm wary of what the proposed Manhattan project would be without specifics. Without details it sounds like a continuation or expansion of the current NSA bulk surveillance programs, which while not explicit encryption backdoors themselves (Dual EC aside), are not an ideal solution.

cowkingdeluxe 11y ago

You seem to have left the fact that Hillary Clinton also ruled out backdoors last night. That is quite a significant statement in my opinion.

spinchange 11y ago
She called for a Manhattan-like project to give law enforcement exceptional access without breaking encryption because "maybe the back door is not the right door." Hardly a ringing endorsement for privacy!
kabdib 11y ago
We hear a lot of things from candidates. But something seems to happen to frosh presidents that makes them go all squishy when it comes to screwing with the natsec apparatus, something more tangible than just the usual collection of forgotten campaign promises. Something more effective than a simple "Four Horsemen" briefing that the CIA/NSA/ETC dust off every fourth January. On the other hand, politicians are snakes and will say anything to get elected. So there's that.
- marcoperaza 11y ago
  It's easy to sit behind a computer or on a debate stage and repeat trite aphorisms like "we can't trade our privacy for security". It's very different when you are personally responsible for the security of not only 300 million Americans, but of the entire world. When you get briefings every day about the activity of people and organizations who will do everything that they can to kill as many innocent people as possible.
nickysielicki 11y ago
That's political doublespeak. No one is going to sit up on a stage and say that they think "backdoors" are a good idea. But if you've been paying attention the past few months, when they're not on stage, both Hillary and Obama have been calling for key escrow. To think she's changed from that while still using the same exact statement of, "Silicon Valley geniuses are going to come around and be our Manhattan project" is wrong.
fivre 11y ago
Backdoors aside, I'm wary of what the proposed Manhattan project would be without specifics. Without details it sounds like a continuation or expansion of the current NSA bulk surveillance programs, which while not explicit encryption backdoors themselves (Dual EC aside), are not an ideal solution.