4 ms·

The meat of the bill is that it establishes a commission (yes yet another, unpaid though!) that will establish and forward best practices to AG Barr concerning

The meat of the bill is that it establishes a commission (yes yet another, unpaid though!) that will establish and forward best practices to AG Barr concerning child sexual exploitation online. It is possible that one of the recommendations might be establishing a backdoor. In the future that recommendation would then be used to argue for legislation. Snowden is great, but do your own research. Edit: I usually trust Snowden as well. I could be missing something in this bill. EFF did not provide specifics. Hopefully someone here can.

dmos62 6y ago
I prefered the context given on this petition page: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/dont-let-congress-kill-encryption/ https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/dont-let-congress-kill-e... > Just a few months ago, Senator Lindsey Graham (R–SC) delivered an ominous threat to Apple, Facebook, and any other tech company that might refuse to kill encryption programs that prevent malicious hackers, law enforcement officers, and others from accessing our private communications systems: "You're going to find a way to do this or we're going to do it for you." > Graham has authored the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act of 2019 — or EARN IT Act [...]
- ghastmaster 6y ago
  > You see, the EARN IT Act grants the Attorney General broad authority to force tech companies to do whatever he wants I looked and could not find this. That article did not offer any specifics either.
  - ptyyy 6y ago
    https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-ban-end-end-encryption-without-actually-banning-it https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-b... Scroll to summary, specifically "Section 230 immunity for CSAM can be earned via 1 of 2 “safe harbors”."
    - panax 6y ago
      Here is some more criticism of the EARN IT Act supporting that https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/03/the_earn-it_act.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/03/the_earn-it_a... Lindsay Graham has repeatedly sought to weaken encryption and mandate backdoors and key escrow. Also in June this year following the EARN IT Act he introduced the Lawful Access To Encrypted Data Act (LAED) which would mandate backdoors: https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/06/there%E2%80%99s-now-even-worse-anti-encryption-bill-earn-it-doesn%E2%80%99t-make-earn-it-bill-ok https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/06/there%E2%80%99s-n... LEAD is extreme and has little support. It is widely believed that the LAED was not intended to be passed but is meant to help pass the EARN IT Act by making the EARN IT Act seem like a more moderate and reasonable piece of legislation. The EARN IT Act is really a ploy by Lindsay Graham and others to bypass Congress on this issue which they cannot otherwise get passed, and allow a small group of people who are not even security experts to develop regulation and mandates (which will probably be against encryption) under the guise of fighting child porn.
    - ghastmaster 6y ago
      The basis of the arguments in that article are based on items that have been stricken from the Act. That article and the EFF post are out of date. Compliance with "best practices" is no longer part of the bill. As of right now there is no teeth to the bill.
coldtea 6y ago
>The meat of the bill is that it establishes a commission (yes yet another, unpaid though!) "Unpaid" here just means paid in other means, exchaging political favors, getting hired by the benefitted companies, etc. Of course the same goes for paid commissions...

dmos62 6y ago

I prefered the context given on this petition page: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/dont-let-congress-kill-encryption/ https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/dont-let-congress-kill-e... > Just a few months ago, Senator Lindsey Graham (R–SC) delivered an ominous threat to Apple, Facebook, and any other tech company that might refuse to kill encryption programs that prevent malicious hackers, law enforcement officers, and others from accessing our private communications systems: "You're going to find a way to do this or we're going to do it for you." > Graham has authored the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act of 2019 — or EARN IT Act [...]

ghastmaster 6y ago
> You see, the EARN IT Act grants the Attorney General broad authority to force tech companies to do whatever he wants I looked and could not find this. That article did not offer any specifics either.
- ptyyy 6y ago
  https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-ban-end-end-encryption-without-actually-banning-it https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-b... Scroll to summary, specifically "Section 230 immunity for CSAM can be earned via 1 of 2 “safe harbors”."
  - panax 6y ago
    Here is some more criticism of the EARN IT Act supporting that https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/03/the_earn-it_act.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/03/the_earn-it_a... Lindsay Graham has repeatedly sought to weaken encryption and mandate backdoors and key escrow. Also in June this year following the EARN IT Act he introduced the Lawful Access To Encrypted Data Act (LAED) which would mandate backdoors: https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/06/there%E2%80%99s-now-even-worse-anti-encryption-bill-earn-it-doesn%E2%80%99t-make-earn-it-bill-ok https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/06/there%E2%80%99s-n... LEAD is extreme and has little support. It is widely believed that the LAED was not intended to be passed but is meant to help pass the EARN IT Act by making the EARN IT Act seem like a more moderate and reasonable piece of legislation. The EARN IT Act is really a ploy by Lindsay Graham and others to bypass Congress on this issue which they cannot otherwise get passed, and allow a small group of people who are not even security experts to develop regulation and mandates (which will probably be against encryption) under the guise of fighting child porn.
  - ghastmaster 6y ago
    The basis of the arguments in that article are based on items that have been stricken from the Act. That article and the EFF post are out of date. Compliance with "best practices" is no longer part of the bill. As of right now there is no teeth to the bill.

coldtea 6y ago

>The meat of the bill is that it establishes a commission (yes yet another, unpaid though!) "Unpaid" here just means paid in other means, exchaging political favors, getting hired by the benefitted companies, etc. Of course the same goes for paid commissions...