New US Bill would require makers of encrypted devices to leave a backdoor

[Bombastinator]

8 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

The conclusion that I come to is that the US conducts mass surveillance operations supported by a secret court.

The assumption that I make is that the allegations that they do this against all people are true.

 

From my research this seems to be the same conclusion that Snowden draws. Actually, he goes further than I have and says that there is evidence that they collect this information en masse.

They do and they don’t according to his evidence.  They do do it to foreign nationals and those contacting foreign nationals in the US though. You contradict yourself saying you make assumptions beyond even his evidence.  
 

The impression I got from the problem US officials had about Snowden was the conclusions he came to were more extreme than reality and there was a worry that even more extreme views might be developed from the data.  It seems you are making Hillary Clinton’s point for her.

[straight_stewie]

12 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

They do do it to foreign nationals and those contacting foreign nationals in the US though.

At the very least also anyone who has contacted one of those people or contacted one of those people who has contacted one of those people.

It's called "two-hop data record acquisition". They are legislatively allowed to collect data on any foreign national who's communications are within US borders (that is, the communication was routed through equipment based in the US, which is virtually all internet based communications), anyone who has contacted a foreign national, or anyone who has contacted someone who has contacted a foreign national. The term "contacted" is defined so vaguely as to possibly include me quoting someone on this forum, for example.

An explanation of that is available from the horses head in the DNI transparency report link I posted in an above reply.

It should be noted that this two-hop strategy likely allows them to eventually collect data on everyone.

[Tristerin]

Back to:

 

This message will self destruct in T minus....

 

[Bombastinator]

6 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

At the very least also anyone who has contacted one of those people or contacted one of those people who has contacted one of those people.

It's called "two-hop data record acquisition". They are legislatively allowed to collect data on any foreign national who's communications are within US borders (that is, the communication was routed through equipment based in the US, which is virtually all internet based communications), anyone who has contacted a foreign national, or anyone who has contacted someone who has contacted a foreign national. The term "contacted" is defined so vaguely as to possibly include me quoting someone on this forum, for example.

An explanation of that is available from the horses head in the DNI transparency report link I posted in an above reply.

It should be noted that this two-hop strategy likely allows them to eventually collect data on everyone.

So assumptions made about how wide two hop goes and the amount of stuff routed through the US (both may be large but possibly exaggerated) I’m not saying I like unregulated two hop.  I could see them being limited to one hop unless they get evidence in one hop stuff for example.  There is a warrant requirement as well I think, which may be being glossed over.  The argument that warrants are almost never denied doesn’t mean they are being abused.  Possibly the reverse.  It does not deny the concept though.  It’s an issue of assuming the worst or trying not to assume.  Again proving Hillary Clinton’s argument.

[Tristerin]

14 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

-snip-

Read a couple of your replies, and the fact you keep the eye of providence as a avatar I have one word for you.

 

Woke.

 

[straight_stewie]

9 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

So assumptions made about how wide two hop goes and the amount of stuff routed through the US (both may be large but possibly exaggerated) I’m not saying I like unregulated two hop.  I could see them being limited to one hop unless they get evidence in one hop stuff for example. 

Since I have communicated with someone on this forum (actually quite a few people) who are "foreign nationals", it's obvious to see that nearly everyone on the forum can now be two hopped. Those that are left out of "nearly everyone" are highly likely to be included by someone else on this forum.

The rest is just applying that logic to people whom I've communicated with on other platforms, including say, various employers I've had who have parents in the Middle East, for example. When I do that, it's obvious, at least to me, that basically everyone I've ever communicated with can be "two hopped" to, and have their information collected just because I've sent a text to my boss.

The rest is just applying that logic to everyone else residing in the country, and everyone else who's internet communications are routed through the country.

As a result, I find it obvious that the programs collect data on basically everyone. If you don't find it obvious, then I can't help you: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

[Tristerin]

18 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

-snip-

If you can think it, and it would benefit a Government - assume it has already been done or tried.  

 

That's my logic - this isn't a game, this is Kings and Queens played with different names ruling their Serfs.  

 

 

Hell has anyone been paying attention to the Clinton trial lately?  Or is it still buried behind 3 pages of Corona?

[Bombastinator]

23 minutes ago, Tristerin said:

If you can think it, and it would benefit a Government - assume it has already been done or tried.  

 

That's my logic - this isn't a game, this is Kings and Queens played with different names ruling their Serfs.  

 

 

Hell has anyone been paying attention to the Clinton trial lately?  Or is it still buried behind 3 pages of Corona?

“The Clinton trial”?  You mean the thing that was dropped several times because judiciary repeatedly said it was stupid and got forced up again by the administration because they considered it a political advantage and has been relegated to the pages of propaganda and conspiracy theory stuff along with pizza gate?  Or do you actually mean pizza gate which was even worse?  The Clinton administration was 90’s era stuff and has nothing to do with the topic.

[Tristerin]

7 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

“The Clinton trial”? 

Oh you didn't know?  Their distractions worked then, so I believe its relevant as the topic is government intrusion and I am of the camp that knows the Government orchestrates things to distract us, and this bill being pushed now is timed like...OTHER events going on right now.  So you don't see it unless you dig.

 

I wont derail this topic - if you are interested in seeing whats going on behind the scenes (3rd page of news) you will research it yourself.  If you aren't interested, sheeple can sheep too I don't care.

[Bombastinator]

12 minutes ago, Tristerin said:

Oh you didn't know?  Their distractions worked then, so I believe its relevant as the topic is government intrusion and I am of the camp that knows the Government orchestrates things to distract us, and this bill being pushed now is timed like...OTHER events going on right now.  So you don't see it unless you dig.

 

I wont derail this topic - if you are interested in seeing whats going on behind the scenes (3rd page of news) you will research it yourself.  If you aren't interested, sheeple can sheep too I don't care.

Oh I’d heard about it.  But it’s political grandstanding using Barr’s control of the justice department.  I view it as having little actually to do with anything which is why I mentioned pizza gate.  They’re comparable.  And not relevant.

[The1Dickens]

Hot take: This is the government's way of attacking Apple after the public circus that was the government begging Apple to hack/crack/backdoor whatever iOS device. Apple defiantly stood their ground, and made the government look like a whiny, only-child to a privileged family. So, the government, petty and narcissistic as they are, have gone this route.

 

"You won't do this thing for me because it's illegal and immoral? FINE! I'll just make it illegal to NOT do it!"

[Bombastinator]

33 minutes ago, The1Dickens said:

Hot take: This is the government's way of attacking Apple after the public circus that was the government begging Apple to hack/crack/backdoor whatever iOS device. Apple defiantly stood their ground, and made the government look like a whiny, only-child to a privileged family. So, the government, petty and narcissistic as they are, have gone this route.

 

"You won't do this thing for me because it's illegal and immoral? FINE! I'll just make it illegal to NOT do it!"

Didn’t they get in anyway via an Israeli company?

[The1Dickens]

28 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Didn’t they get in anyway via an Israeli company?

I don't remember if they did or if they had enough evidence without it to proceed to trial and get the desired conviction. I just remember Apple putting out a statement clearly outlining why they don't do that, and why nobody should do that.

[StDragon]

On 6/30/2020 at 11:20 AM, GDRRiley said:

What other card would they pull? They go no way to polish this turd 

As they say in sales; if you can't polish a turd, try rolling it in glitter.

[StDragon]

One day, cybornetic implants will be forced to have a backdoor. So any thoughts stored will be recoverable. So how would that not violate the 5th amendment of self-incrimination? We're not there. But when we do reach that point of having this technology, it will make its way to SCOTUS.

[straight_stewie]

4 hours ago, StDragon said:

One day, cybornetic implants will be forced to have a backdoor. So any thoughts stored will be recoverable. So how would that not violate the 5th amendment of self-incrimination? We're not there. But when we do reach that point of having this technology, it will make its way to SCOTUS.

If passed it will get repealed pretty quick whether it ever goes to SCOTUS or not:

• Millions of people harmed by big data breach. Investigators find that the hackers exploited a government mandated backdoor.
• Class action lawsuit against the company that manufactured the device or software with the government mandated backdoor.
• Business(es) responsible have to pay out potentially billions of dollars to repay damages.
• Business(es) decry the governments order.

Rinse and repeat until Americans and their businesses are so upset about it that they start causing the government problems over it.

 

OR

 

• Government relies on services that the government requires have a backdoor
• Government gets fuxed because of their stupidity
• Government changes the law

 

But we're crossing bridges that aren't even built yet: bills like this have been introduced more than a few times before and they never pass. Let's hope that this one doesn't either.

[JustAnotherOverClocker]

On 6/28/2020 at 12:13 AM, RejZoR said:

You clearly don't understand what is at stake here. XDA doesn't change a damn thing. It's Google, Signal, Protonmail, Microsoft, all these companies and many more would be forced to built in encryption backdoors for US government agencies to tap in at any time without having to defeat encryption. All this is before it even reaches your garage cooked XDA stuff on your phone. Or shall I say right in the middle of it.

 

These idiots just don't realize that once you have a back door to things it becomes an exploitation vector and assuming or even thinking it'll only be used by the "good guys" is just brain dead way of thinking. Not to mention doing so defeats the purpose of encryption. Encryption is really the only trust method online and it's already often getting broken intentionally or unintentionally with MITM methods. Fiddling with this because of muh terrorism or muh pedophiles will ruin this trust entirely and we may just as well shut down the internet then. No sane person would ever pass this dumb bill, but given how many times they've already tried it, I'm guessing it'll pass at some point because they'll just be trying until it passes.

Signal has said they might consider abandoning the US market if shit like this continues to happens.

 

https://signal.org/blog/earn-it/