3 ms·
I'm patiently waiting for their proposed method of reading end-to-end encrypted messages without introducing a systemic weakness. I imagine that they ask for s
by caf 8y ago
I'm patiently waiting for their proposed method of reading end-to-end encrypted messages without introducing a systemic weakness.
I imagine that they ask for some tailored malware to be delivered to the specifically targeted device/user.
- bigiain 8y agoSo the UK spooks have a wonderful euphemism for this. "Equipment interference": https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2018/12/06/uk_gchq_bulk_equipment_interference/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2018/12/06/uk_gchq_bulk_eq... Which, of course, leads on to a somewhat less specifically targeted "Bulk equipment interference", because once we have the capability, it'll _surely_ not get misused, right? I'm eagerly awaiting the hilarious verbal gymnastics they'll come up with to make a Technical Assistance Notice compelled "Bulk equipment interference" capability some how not a "systemic weakness"... I'm sure that'll end up in linguistics textbooks and industry jokes for decades...
- brokenmachine 8y agoWe won't see any of that hilarious verbal gymnastics because any individual would be crazy to try to fight one of these orders and face 10 years in jail. The govt will just secretly compel them, and their activity stays secret - except the bad guys can now hack our compromised infrastructure and there will be inevitable leaks of data and exploits, just like Wannacry which was originally an NSA exploit.