3 ms·

It's possible to solve this technically ,such that the encryption will happen on government mandated servers, in a fully secure manner that doesn't hurt most bu

by minthd 11y ago

It's possible to solve this technically ,such that the encryption will happen on government mandated servers, in a fully secure manner that doesn't hurt most businesses - and hat's probably how they'll handle that.

batou 11y ago
I'm not sure if this comment is a joke, shill or some serious fucking crack smoking. The chain of trust is broken. It doesn't matter where or who does it.
- minthd 11y ago
  It's a serious comment. Sure doing it this way would give the government access to all your knowledge(not really a new state of things). But that won't stop commerce - as long as security from theft is guaranteed, which i think can be assumed under government control.
  - batou 11y ago
    You are completely misguided then: 1. You consider the government as a singular entity. It's a group of people. In that circumstance, it's as secure as the lowest denominator of person, which in a government is low. 2. You're find for them retaining your data, then implementing a law, then using it against you? 3. There are plenty of cases where the government have abused data that has been entrusted to them. There is no commercial motivation via competition for them to do a good job. You are effectively contracting out to a monopoly. 4. There is no absolute security either and it should be in your own hands. The moment you contract it out, you're morally responsible for the competence of who you contracted it out to, yet the government isn't an entity you can easily take to court nor seek compensation from. 5. Keys are complicated to distribute. Do you expect this to be 100% effective? Consider these a little further then check your opinion against the facts on the table.
    - minthd 11y ago
      With regards to secure technology ,governments, or at least armies and intelligence agencies are most likely leading the race. With regards embezzeling government money in such system: i believe(and could be wrong), that generally, this isn't a worse problem than the private system. And again, this a problem armies/intel agencies have been dealing it over a long time ,with far higher risks. And of course there's always options of secure auditing(maybe like bitcoin) , further reducing the risk. With regards to key distribution - if we look at the awful security afforded by credit cards, even though we know how to solve this(chip and pin, for ex.) i'm not sure the government is worse. As for the issues of power of government and potential for abuse of that power - sure i definitely agree with you(it's a huge problem even today). But again, my comment was about that it's possible to do so in a way that would be compatible with online commerce.
      - batou 11y ago
        I worked in the defense sector in that particular area. They're really not very advanced. Academia is way ahead of them. It's all about the rubber hose, key escrow arrangements and politics.
        minthd 11y ago
        But academia is also way ahead of commercial products. Do you really think that the defense industry is work than the commercial sector ?
- onion2k 11y ago
  "Nothing the government can't read" doesn't mean no encryption. It means that there has to be a stored version of the message and the encryption key is handed over if asked, otherwise you go to prison. It'll be no different to what we have now (it's already illegal to withhold an encryption key) but with mandated storage.
  - batou 11y ago
    So they can factor your keys at their leisure? No chance.
darkarmani 11y ago
You mean it won't hurt most businesses because it will hurt all of them? Here is how the US gov't secures sensitive information: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/06/opm_hack_it_s_a_catastrophe_here_s_how_the_government_can_stop_the_next.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/0...

by minthd 11y ago

batou 11y ago

I'm not sure if this comment is a joke, shill or some serious fucking crack smoking. The chain of trust is broken. It doesn't matter where or who does it.

minthd 11y ago
It's a serious comment. Sure doing it this way would give the government access to all your knowledge(not really a new state of things). But that won't stop commerce - as long as security from theft is guaranteed, which i think can be assumed under government control.
- batou 11y ago
  You are completely misguided then: 1. You consider the government as a singular entity. It's a group of people. In that circumstance, it's as secure as the lowest denominator of person, which in a government is low. 2. You're find for them retaining your data, then implementing a law, then using it against you? 3. There are plenty of cases where the government have abused data that has been entrusted to them. There is no commercial motivation via competition for them to do a good job. You are effectively contracting out to a monopoly. 4. There is no absolute security either and it should be in your own hands. The moment you contract it out, you're morally responsible for the competence of who you contracted it out to, yet the government isn't an entity you can easily take to court nor seek compensation from. 5. Keys are complicated to distribute. Do you expect this to be 100% effective? Consider these a little further then check your opinion against the facts on the table.
  - minthd 11y ago
    With regards to secure technology ,governments, or at least armies and intelligence agencies are most likely leading the race. With regards embezzeling government money in such system: i believe(and could be wrong), that generally, this isn't a worse problem than the private system. And again, this a problem armies/intel agencies have been dealing it over a long time ,with far higher risks. And of course there's always options of secure auditing(maybe like bitcoin) , further reducing the risk. With regards to key distribution - if we look at the awful security afforded by credit cards, even though we know how to solve this(chip and pin, for ex.) i'm not sure the government is worse. As for the issues of power of government and potential for abuse of that power - sure i definitely agree with you(it's a huge problem even today). But again, my comment was about that it's possible to do so in a way that would be compatible with online commerce.
    - batou 11y ago
      I worked in the defense sector in that particular area. They're really not very advanced. Academia is way ahead of them. It's all about the rubber hose, key escrow arrangements and politics.
      - minthd 11y ago
        But academia is also way ahead of commercial products. Do you really think that the defense industry is work than the commercial sector ?
onion2k 11y ago
"Nothing the government can't read" doesn't mean no encryption. It means that there has to be a stored version of the message and the encryption key is handed over if asked, otherwise you go to prison. It'll be no different to what we have now (it's already illegal to withhold an encryption key) but with mandated storage.
- batou 11y ago
  So they can factor your keys at their leisure? No chance.

darkarmani 11y ago

You mean it won't hurt most businesses because it will hurt all of them? Here is how the US gov't secures sensitive information: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/06/opm_hack_it_s_a_catastrophe_here_s_how_the_government_can_stop_the_next.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/0...