4 ms·

I mean, now you're just talking about intent, and thus have to trust that the intent is as claimed. Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or

I mean, now you're just talking about intent, and thus have to trust that the intent is as claimed. Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not.

gruez 7y ago
>Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Okay, let's say the telecom equipment doesn't have a backdoor for lawful intercept. What happens if the telecom is served with a warrant? Are you expecting that the telecoms will refuse to cooperate with the authorities?
- feanaro 7y ago
  They shouldn't refuse, but they should be allowed to be unable to cooperate.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- count 7y ago
  No, if there's no lawful intercept, they can cooperate fully, but it won't matter because there's nothing to get.
- aliceryhl 7y ago
  I'm not really making a statement about that. All I'm saying is that if you have a backdoor that can do the former, it must necessarily also be a backdoor that can do the latter.
- makomk 7y ago
  They'd probably be able to co-operate anyway, but it'd require manual intervention by telco employees. What makes these US-mandated lawful intercept backdoors particularly nasty is that they provide an automatic way of exfiltrating data that is designed to conceal its use from employees - in essence, a built-in rootkit that compromises the integrity of telecoms systems even in countries that don't actually want this kind of backdoor. This isn't a hypothetical issue; the US has reactivated this feature to spy on politicians in countries that didn't actually want or need it on their exchanges in the first place.
archi42 7y ago
> Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Actually, backdoors could be implemented to require a cryptographically signed warrant. Think e.g. lawful intercept on mobile network routers, US (or any other nation's) law could just add this as a requirement. You could even develop a complicated scheme to apply this to E2E crypto. But of course skewing the RNG to be predictable, or implanting some hardware backdoor, is much easier and has the added bonus of being usable to spy not only on your own citizens, but also on other nations.
- SAI_Peregrinus 7y ago
  Then it just needs a valid signing key. Every government (local, state, national) in the world has the right to a valid signing key.

I mean, now you're just talking about intent, and thus have to trust that the intent is as claimed. Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not.

gruez 7y ago

>Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Okay, let's say the telecom equipment doesn't have a backdoor for lawful intercept. What happens if the telecom is served with a warrant? Are you expecting that the telecoms will refuse to cooperate with the authorities?

feanaro 7y ago
They shouldn't refuse, but they should be allowed to be unable to cooperate.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
count 7y ago
No, if there's no lawful intercept, they can cooperate fully, but it won't matter because there's nothing to get.
aliceryhl 7y ago
I'm not really making a statement about that. All I'm saying is that if you have a backdoor that can do the former, it must necessarily also be a backdoor that can do the latter.
makomk 7y ago
They'd probably be able to co-operate anyway, but it'd require manual intervention by telco employees. What makes these US-mandated lawful intercept backdoors particularly nasty is that they provide an automatic way of exfiltrating data that is designed to conceal its use from employees - in essence, a built-in rootkit that compromises the integrity of telecoms systems even in countries that don't actually want this kind of backdoor. This isn't a hypothetical issue; the US has reactivated this feature to spy on politicians in countries that didn't actually want or need it on their exchanges in the first place.

archi42 7y ago

> Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Actually, backdoors could be implemented to require a cryptographically signed warrant. Think e.g. lawful intercept on mobile network routers, US (or any other nation's) law could just add this as a requirement. You could even develop a complicated scheme to apply this to E2E crypto. But of course skewing the RNG to be predictable, or implanting some hardware backdoor, is much easier and has the added bonus of being usable to spy not only on your own citizens, but also on other nations.

SAI_Peregrinus 7y ago
Then it just needs a valid signing key. Every government (local, state, national) in the world has the right to a valid signing key.