FBI Head: Apple, Google Encryption Leads to 'Dark Place'

[Paul Wagenseil]

FBI Director James Comey told a Washington audience that the privacy features of Android and iOS devices would let criminals go free.

FBI Head: Apple, Google Encryption Leads to 'Dark Place' : Read more

 

[junkeymonkey]

that's right your privacy needs to be illegal and you should put all of you out there for them to keep tabs on you at all times as they see fit .. I mean who the hell do you think you are keeping you life privet?? shame on you

all I read in civics class about America and communism I now wonder if they got that wrong ??

the commies said '' we will change and take over America with out firing a shot'' looks like there close to doing that .. ever notice how after 911 how your rights have quickly dwindled away in the name of freedom and home land security ??? like just to get a job or driver license you now have to clear and be reported to the gov for there ok to be hired ?? ya in order to punish the threats to us we got to punish ourselves first look at pictures of commi states police ,Russia china so on from 20 years ago to today they look like military forces now look at you police force in town its not the cops in the nice blue uniform that shows up it the military bdu dressed guy with a m16
democracy and communist is now a gray area and a thin line between them

folks say well we got the Constitution and bill of rights , well them s just a piece of paper and is only as strong as YOU to back it up not your elected officials

 

[hajila]

And BTW, even if you get a warrant I will never ever hand over my password for my encryption. My personal stuff is mine and will always remain mine!

That's okay Hardy because they don't need your password. They have the ciphers to open up anything they please. Just stay on the right side of the law or stay small enough to go unnoticed and you'll be fine. Otherwise, I'm sad to say, they can get anything they please.

 

[cats_Paw]

"One case concerned the murder of a 12-year-old Louisiana boy, in which evidence on both the victim's and perpetrator's phones helped convict the killer. Comey didn't explain how decryption could have prevented the murder."

If you need to access the phone of someone dumb enough to keep incriminating evidence on his phone in order to get a conviction, perhaps you need to hire smarter people.

oh wait... smarter people dont like the FBI.

 

[Skylyne]

That's okay Hardy because they don't need your password. They have the ciphers to open up anything they please. Just stay on the right side of the law or stay small enough to go unnoticed and you'll be fine. Otherwise, I'm sad to say, they can get anything they please.

It really depends on which encryption method is used, as the alphabet agencies have most encryption methods cracked. There are still some methods of encryption that are up in the air, concerning whether the NSA has cracked it, but it doesn't mean they definitely have. By default it's best to assume they have it cracked, but the likelihood of them using such a cipher is quite low; you'd have to really pose a substantial threat to national security, as decrypting someone's phone with a cipher is a pretty big deal. While it's possible they could plug it into a laptop and rip everything off in ten minutes, that forces them to admit there is no safe encryption; and admitting that would then cause every known intelligence agency to focus even harder on cracking encryption further... and that creates a giant shit storm of cyber insanity. It's within the interest of national security to keep what little encryption secrets we have left quiet.

In fact, I'm sure Snowden has something leading to the NSA's potential capabilities of AES cracking. If he does, I would assume he didn't leak them for a similar reason. Admitting he even has such a thing would cause some serious problems in the security and hacking community alone, and agencies like NSA and GCHQ would have a field day over this information (both literally and sarcastically). It would be a very tough thing for everyone to swallow, if all encryption was cracked by now. While agencies could take advantage of that, it then creates more problems than it solves.

There's a much bigger picture they are trying to keep on the DL than many want to believe; and it's all for good reason. I may not support it, but it is fairly logical in their position..

 

[junkeymonkey]

likw osoma Obama care -- government strong arming at its best

''oh wait... smarter people dont like the FBI.''---

no that's wrong , its the fbi don't like smart people out smarting them

 

[HEXiT]

i love how there claiming this is to stop crime.
when all the evidence was gathered after a crime happend.
it hasnt stopped anything, just helped secure a conviction after the fact.
which they probably had enough evidence for anyway without going through the user data.

i mean come on the terrorists (the reason these powers were given) are in the middle east. thats where they need to be gathering data, both from the web and on the ground. not sitting at home like a barnacle sticking your feelers out and grabbing what ever passes your terminals to the interweb

technology cant keep us safe and any 1 that thinks it can is mistaken. it can help you prove your case after the fact but theres little to no chance of catching something before it happens... case in point the Boston bombings. the guys had phones, they communicated about what they were doing for months before hand but was there any 1 there to stop them on the day? NO!. the government were clueless (or so they claim)

 

[Marcus Marik]

The government can crack any *individual* encrypted system by throwing enough computing power at them. What they can't do is crack *all* of them. They're whining and moaning because encryption forces them to limit themselves to a small set of genuine suspects (i.e. what they're supposed to do anyway) rather than spying on everybody.

 

[everygamer]

Encryption is a double-edged sword, we protect personal information, but the bad people of the world have ways to communicate and plan in secret. It's always finding that balance between personal security and national security that makes sense.

At the end of the day, if Apple and Goole encrypt the data, the FBI, CIA and NSA can still access that data by supenaing Google and Apple to provide the data. This is the balance, we protect our private data, and the government has to go through proper legal process to obtain personal data. Seems the fair way to do it.

 

[jakjawagon]

the place they are leading us is one we shouldn’t go to without careful thought and debate.

Like all the careful thought and debate that nobody (at least publicly) had before the NSA and GCHQ started intercepting internet traffic.

 

[The Shootist]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

INCLUDES DIGITAL DEVICES

 

[Skylyne]

The government can crack any *individual* encrypted system by throwing enough computing power at them. What they can't do is crack *all* of them. They're whining and moaning because encryption forces them to limit themselves to a small set of genuine suspects (i.e. what they're supposed to do anyway) rather than spying on everybody.

Yes, and no. Cracking encryption isn't as easy as many claim. Depending on what encryption method is used, it could take over a hundred years to crack the encryption. While there are many methods currently used to crack certain forms of cryptography (like cracking MD5 with "short-cut" algorithms), you can't do this with every method of encryption. Yes... you can crack just about anything, when you put enough processing power to it; but the law of diminishing returns kicks in VERY quickly. Is it worth dedicating all that processing power to crack one device/item when the cracking could take 5 years? In the eye of Homeland Security, it probably is better to dedicate extra resources to reconnaissance and other means of data collection.

While agencies are spying on everyone, as a "precaution" or other, this encryption debate really stems from the desire to prevent "terrorists" from having this ability as well. The funny thing is that they aren't attacking the makers of the Blackphone, or PrivatOS.

 

[Don Reid]

"Have we become so suspicious of government, and of law enforcement, that we will let bad guys walk away?"

Yes. I would rather the bad guys walk for lack of evidence gained by spying than to sacrifice the privacy of 300M people. Do you really want everything you have said stored for two years for FBI fishing expeditions? Do you really think the government won't go data mining to find violators of regulations and the tax code. (Gee, George. Was that really a business dinner where you watched a streaming video of a football game?)

 

[junkeymonkey]

sad thing is its coming down to its us or them. look at his white house fence jumping thing.. your the public you pay taxes the white house is a public funded /supported public property and you go there to enjoy it and they suck a dog on you ...


like now the schools got fences around them and if your not a student during school hrs. or events you cant go there to lets say shoot the hoops or use the ball field they will come and haul you off no trespassing .. what public proptry paid for with public funds and tyou the public is trespassing ?? yup , your tax dollars working hard for you .. opps I mean Against you ..

 

[Skylyne]

I'm waiting for the day that people are under blatant 24 hour surveillance, there's a 'safety' curfew, and all of television is government owned/operated... and people are watching V for Vendetta on some bootleg thinking, "Wow, I would hate for our government to go that overboard with surveillance."

Then again, we're not that far from that situation.

 

[junkeymonkey]

don't think your not or there not