7 ms·

Holy crap that is a bureaucratic nightmare. Why does encryption even need to be registered in the first place? I don't see any point beyond the holdover of 'enc

by NamTaf 11y ago

Holy crap that is a bureaucratic nightmare. Why does encryption even need to be registered in the first place? I don't see any point beyond the holdover of 'encryption is munitions' which is a pile of crap in the first place.

weinzierl 11y ago
Some say that this kind of policy is coming back. Crypto Wars Part II The Empires Strike Back Kurt Opsahl Deputy Executive Director of the EFF https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7386-crypto_wars_part_ii#video https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7386-crypto_wars_part_ii#video There is no first part of this specific talk. The talk is only called "Part II" because of the Crypto Wars of the nineties. If you are interested in the "Part I" history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States is a good starter.
yuhong 11y ago
It was even worse before 2010, which was why Evernote used 64-bit RC2 encryption.
- pupeno 11y ago
  Throughout the process I found left-overs from the previous processes and yes, it looked much worse. The worst part for me is that there were steps in the process than though simple, they were not defined anywhere and thus it required me calling various departments to ask for clarifications.
chrischen 11y ago
Encryptions is munitions. It is the modern day "arms" that that the spirit of the 2nd amendment to the US constitution was trying to protect as a fail-safe to an overreaching corrupted government. We don't need to bear arms anymore because we don't walk around dueling people at high noon anymore, but being an information based economy and information based society, encryption is the new gun in the wild world web.
- aftbit 11y ago
  We continue to need to bear arms of all sorts, equal to those that the military uses. As you pointed out, the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to avoid tyranny in a powerful central government. As long as the (federally funded & led) military uses firearms, responsible civilians _must_ also keep & bear them.
  - Pharaoh2 11y ago
    If that is so, then we have already lost. No firearm held by the citizens can compete with the firepower of the military of today. The spirit of the amendment may have been in the right place and surely worked when the constitution was written but we live in a very different world now and if you still think the an armed citizenry will avoid tyranny, you need to go to youtube and see what the military can now do.
    - threatofrain 11y ago
      I believe the right to bear arms has been interpreted not only to mean the individual right to own and operate firearms, but also the right to form militias, or paramilitary organizations. It is unlikely for a paramilitary organization to compete with the armed forces, but in a state where the country is stressed and divided, I don't think the armed forces would stand as a fully united organization. However, while I do concede that my argument is weak, I also assert that it is not nil.
      - chrischen 11y ago
        If you really wanted to oppose the government you'd encrypt your communications. Clearly that's s greater threat since government so vehemently wants to deny that (it's in their self interest to increase their power).
    - woah 11y ago
      Are you sure about that? Look at Iraq. Also, while soldiers in the military might be fine oppressing a compliant populace, how many will jump ship if they are forced to wage actual war on their countrypersons?
rdtsc 11y ago
Because you might be exporting it to an un-friendly country. Don't try to apply logic here -- "But can't they just compile openssl or just use Linux!? or some library..." -- this is government contracting and security world, regular logic doesn't work here.
- perlpimp 11y ago
  what if I am working in un-friendly country trying to import it to friendly countries via the App Store?
  - pupeno 11y ago
    For exporting to friendly countries via App Store, you'll need an ERN. I'm not sure if the App Store will accept submission from unfriendly countries. It depends which one I guess.
    - rdtsc 11y ago
      Apple itself probably doesn't really care. Just needs to cover its ass in case Uncle Sam looks and asks questions. They can now say "We have enabled these checks and features on our side".
ryandrake 11y ago
Bureaucratic nightmare? Don't you think that's an exaggeration? Sure, the government's web site UX is atrocious, but at the end of the day, it's just a couple of web forms and E-mail verification, similar to signing up for any web site. Try to legally immigrate to the U.S. and then come back and tell me that this web site is a "bureaucratic nightmare".
- NamTaf 11y ago
  I agree that US migration processes are a bureaucratic nightmare also. I don't think it's an exaggeration when I phrase the term as 'overly unnecessary bureaucratic process that causes people incredible frustration'. Note that the OP said that the list was the effort of months of trying to understand and negotiate the system. Just because it appears to be 'a couple of web forms and email verification', it's in no way similar to signing up for a web site because it's behind so much opacity. You can't judge the effort involved in producing something simply by its final output.

by NamTaf 11y ago

weinzierl 11y ago

Some say that this kind of policy is coming back. Crypto Wars Part II The Empires Strike Back Kurt Opsahl Deputy Executive Director of the EFF https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7386-crypto_wars_part_ii#video https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7386-crypto_wars_part_ii#video There is no first part of this specific talk. The talk is only called "Part II" because of the Crypto Wars of the nineties. If you are interested in the "Part I" history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States is a good starter.

yuhong 11y ago

It was even worse before 2010, which was why Evernote used 64-bit RC2 encryption.

pupeno 11y ago
Throughout the process I found left-overs from the previous processes and yes, it looked much worse. The worst part for me is that there were steps in the process than though simple, they were not defined anywhere and thus it required me calling various departments to ask for clarifications.

chrischen 11y ago

Encryptions is munitions. It is the modern day "arms" that that the spirit of the 2nd amendment to the US constitution was trying to protect as a fail-safe to an overreaching corrupted government. We don't need to bear arms anymore because we don't walk around dueling people at high noon anymore, but being an information based economy and information based society, encryption is the new gun in the wild world web.

aftbit 11y ago
We continue to need to bear arms of all sorts, equal to those that the military uses. As you pointed out, the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to avoid tyranny in a powerful central government. As long as the (federally funded & led) military uses firearms, responsible civilians _must_ also keep & bear them.
- Pharaoh2 11y ago
  If that is so, then we have already lost. No firearm held by the citizens can compete with the firepower of the military of today. The spirit of the amendment may have been in the right place and surely worked when the constitution was written but we live in a very different world now and if you still think the an armed citizenry will avoid tyranny, you need to go to youtube and see what the military can now do.
  - threatofrain 11y ago
    I believe the right to bear arms has been interpreted not only to mean the individual right to own and operate firearms, but also the right to form militias, or paramilitary organizations. It is unlikely for a paramilitary organization to compete with the armed forces, but in a state where the country is stressed and divided, I don't think the armed forces would stand as a fully united organization. However, while I do concede that my argument is weak, I also assert that it is not nil.
    - chrischen 11y ago
      If you really wanted to oppose the government you'd encrypt your communications. Clearly that's s greater threat since government so vehemently wants to deny that (it's in their self interest to increase their power).
  - woah 11y ago
    Are you sure about that? Look at Iraq. Also, while soldiers in the military might be fine oppressing a compliant populace, how many will jump ship if they are forced to wage actual war on their countrypersons?

rdtsc 11y ago

Because you might be exporting it to an un-friendly country. Don't try to apply logic here -- "But can't they just compile openssl or just use Linux!? or some library..." -- this is government contracting and security world, regular logic doesn't work here.

perlpimp 11y ago
what if I am working in un-friendly country trying to import it to friendly countries via the App Store?
- pupeno 11y ago
  For exporting to friendly countries via App Store, you'll need an ERN. I'm not sure if the App Store will accept submission from unfriendly countries. It depends which one I guess.
  - rdtsc 11y ago
    Apple itself probably doesn't really care. Just needs to cover its ass in case Uncle Sam looks and asks questions. They can now say "We have enabled these checks and features on our side".

ryandrake 11y ago

Bureaucratic nightmare? Don't you think that's an exaggeration? Sure, the government's web site UX is atrocious, but at the end of the day, it's just a couple of web forms and E-mail verification, similar to signing up for any web site. Try to legally immigrate to the U.S. and then come back and tell me that this web site is a "bureaucratic nightmare".

NamTaf 11y ago
I agree that US migration processes are a bureaucratic nightmare also. I don't think it's an exaggeration when I phrase the term as 'overly unnecessary bureaucratic process that causes people incredible frustration'. Note that the OP said that the list was the effort of months of trying to understand and negotiate the system. Just because it appears to be 'a couple of web forms and email verification', it's in no way similar to signing up for a web site because it's behind so much opacity. You can't judge the effort involved in producing something simply by its final output.