Will you get the encryption keys for encryption software created by Russia? China? North Korea? Pakistan? India? Abdullah? Alexy and Ivan, etc.?
No, you won't. The assumption being that nobody but the US can create encryption software or that everyone will hand over encryption keys to the US.
Riddling only US software with backdoors and security holes is not really an answer.
You want to give all encryption keys to a government that let an army private get access to all State Dept. Emails....and had a contractor make public their whole layout?
Ok, whatever.
Quote:The Snowden revelations weren’t significant because they told The Terrorists their communications were being monitored; everyone — especially The Terrorists — has known that forever. The revelations were significant because they told the world that the NSA and its allies were collecting everyone else’s internet communications and activities.
The evidence proving this — that The Terrorists have been successfully using sophisticated encryption and other surveillance-avoidance methods for many years prior to Snowden — is so overwhelming that nobody should be willing to claim otherwise with a straight face. As but one of countless examples, here’s a USA Today article from February 2001 — more than 12 years before anyone knew the name “Edward Snowden” — warning that al Qaeda was able to “outfox law enforcement” by hiding its communications behind sophisticated internet encryption:
![[Image: usatoday1.png]](https://prod01-cdn07.cdn.firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/2015/11/usatoday1.png)
Quote:The Christian Science Monitor similarly reported on February 1, 2001, that “the head of the U.S. National Security Agency has publicly complained that al Qaeda’s sophisticated use of the internet and encryption techniques have defied Western eavesdropping attempts.”
After 9/11, we were constantly told about how wily and advanced The Terrorists were when it came to hiding their communications from us. One scary graphic from the November 2001 issue of Network World laid it out this way:
![[Image: computernetwork.png]](https://prod01-cdn07.cdn.firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/2015/11/computernetwork.png)
Quote:All the way back in the mid-1990s, the Clinton administration exploited the fears prompted by Timothy McVeigh’s Oklahoma City attack to demand backdoor access to all internet communications. This is what then-FBI Director Louis Freeh told the Senate Judiciary Committee in July 1997 — almost 20 years ago:
The looming spectre of the widespread use of robust, virtually uncrackable encryption is one of the most difficult problems confronting law enforcement as the next century approaches. At stake are some of our most valuable and reliable investigative techniques, and the public safety of our citizens. We believe that unless a balanced approach to encryption is adopted that includes a viable key management infrastructure, the ability of law enforcement to investigate and sometimes prevent the most serious crimes and terrorism will be severely impaired. Our national security will also be jeopardized.
![[Image: nyt19971-1000x507.png]](https://prod01-cdn07.cdn.firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/2015/11/nyt19971-1000x507.png)
Quote:How dumb do they think people are to count on them forgetting all of this, and to believe now that The Terrorists only learned to avoid telephones and use encryption once Snowden came along? Ironically, the Snowden archive itself is full of documents from NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ, expressing deep concern that they cannot penetrate the communications of Terrorists because of how sophisticated their surveillance-avoidance methods are (obviously, those documents pre-date Snowden’s public disclosures).
Exploiting Emotions About Paris to Blame Snowden, Distract from Actual Culprits Who Empowered ISIS
**** YOU SNOWDEN FOR YOUR LEAKS RETROACTIVELY CAUSING 9/11 BY TIPPING OFF THE TERRORISTS!!!
There's plenty more in that article that crushes this entire stupid notion, but I'll let you explore for yourselves.
(11-16-2015 08:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Ron Paul: "Here's the solution to Paris: Reject regime change, stop shipping weapons, no more bombs, and robust defense at home."
That last part is the essential piece of his message that the neocon right is unwilling to give him credit for--and unwilling to embrace themselves.
hmmm....I like most of the Paul duo's platform except their foreign policy.
I wonder if Putin will have second thoughts about Snowden living in Russia?
(11-17-2015 04:12 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder if Putin will have second thoughts about Snowden living in Russia?
Since Obama will PO lots of people with his Midnight Pardon List anyway, maybe he's banking on some distractions?
(11-17-2015 04:39 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2015 04:12 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder if Putin will have second thoughts about Snowden living in Russia?
Since Obama will PO lots of people with his Midnight Pardon List anyway, maybe he's banking on some distractions?
No telling how O will pardon. Not sure I've ever agreed with that process no matter the POTUS. Given that ISIS claimed responsibility for the bomb on the downed Russian jetliner and give Snowden has helped the terrorist by revealing secrets, etc it seems he would become persona non grata to Putin.
(11-16-2015 05:57 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ]Robust defense at home includes:
1. No unvetted refugees released into US. Keep them in Secured Locations like you saw in Scarface.
2. Local Law Enforcement surveillance of Religious/Cultural Groups affiliated with Middle East populations.
3. Lots of National Security Wiretap Warrants through FISA.
4. NSA gets the encription keys from the handset manufacturers
And a draft. Let's get every swinging able-bodied d---k involved while we're at it.
Hell, I'd go back in. I'm 54 but I'm in pretty good shape (ran a half marathon in September) can still shoot an M203, and I think I could probably still hit what I'm aiming at with an AT4. (I think that's what replaced the LAW).
Does Army still have the 203s, anybody know?
(11-18-2015 10:57 AM)gsu95 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2015 05:57 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ]Robust defense at home includes:
1. No unvetted refugees released into US. Keep them in Secured Locations like you saw in Scarface.
2. Local Law Enforcement surveillance of Religious/Cultural Groups affiliated with Middle East populations.
3. Lots of National Security Wiretap Warrants through FISA.
4. NSA gets the encription keys from the handset manufacturers
And a draft. Let's get every swinging able-bodied d---k involved while we're at it.
Hell, I'd go back in. I'm 54 but I'm in pretty good shape (ran a half marathon in September) can still shoot an M203, and I think I could probably still hit what I'm aiming at with an AT4. (I think that's what replaced the LAW).
Does Army still have the 203s, anybody know?
We did in 2006. Unfortunately, they're not all that relevant considering today's ROE's.
(11-18-2015 10:59 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote: [ -> ] (11-18-2015 10:57 AM)gsu95 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2015 05:57 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ]Robust defense at home includes:
1. No unvetted refugees released into US. Keep them in Secured Locations like you saw in Scarface.
2. Local Law Enforcement surveillance of Religious/Cultural Groups affiliated with Middle East populations.
3. Lots of National Security Wiretap Warrants through FISA.
4. NSA gets the encription keys from the handset manufacturers
And a draft. Let's get every swinging able-bodied d---k involved while we're at it.
Hell, I'd go back in. I'm 54 but I'm in pretty good shape (ran a half marathon in September) can still shoot an M203, and I think I could probably still hit what I'm aiming at with an AT4. (I think that's what replaced the LAW).
Does Army still have the 203s, anybody know?
We did in 2006. Unfortunately, they're not all that relevant considering today's ROE's.
Need to seriously overhaul those too, I believe. If we want to win this thing militarily.
The anti-encryption people on this thread scare the hell out of me with their ignorance and their willingness to hand IMMENSE power to the government because of their ignorance.
Facts:
1) Encryption is a double edged sword. Duh. When you ask for the ability of the government to be able to break crypto, you are also BY DEFINITION simultaneously asking for global death of digital privacy. Your online banking transactions. Your conversations. Your social media. Your email. All of it would be not just subject to government snooping by the United States ... but eventually by criminals and foreign governments as well. The very nature of security will see to it that eventually the keys to the government backdoor are cracked, leaked, stolen, or similarly compromised. That is a global catastrophic security failure with no recovery. Given these realities ... terrorists and criminals having unbreakable crypto is a price I am willing to pay for EVERYBODY (including businesses, individuals, and allegedly "good" governments) to be able to have unbreakable crypto as well.
2) The crypto genie is out of the box. Implementing encryption control is like trying your hand at global gun control: good luck with that you naive peckerhead. Elliptic curve crypto is even stronger and on the near horizon in terms of widespread use. These are mathematical concepts known worldwide. Unless you've got a Men In Black memory pen we don't know about, you're living in a fantasy world thinking you'll be able to control encryption. All you'd be doing is destroying the privacy and security of the law abiding, while the terrorists and criminals salivate over their targets suddenly being unable to defend themselves.
3) Even if you were to magically break all worldwide crypto ... open source software advocates (FSF, OIN, Linux Foundation, etc), privacy advocates (EFF, etc), adversarial foreign powers (China, Russia, etc), and neutral foreign powers with strong privacy ethic (much of the EU) would create a new standard and throw away all of your work anyway.
My how far the "anti-war" left has come. We're less than a decade removed from Dubya can't do anything right, protests weekly over war, and rhetoric about the war being illegal and without a declaration. And now we've reached Obama can do no wrong with the same policies, no protests anywhere, who cares if war is declared, and hey ... let's eliminate encryption and all privacy for US citizens while we're at it.
YOU PEOPLE SCARE THE **** OUT OF ME.
More damning info for the "Blame Snowden" sheep:
Quote:Yet news emerging from Paris — as well as evidence from a Belgian ISIS raid in January — suggests that the ISIS terror networks involved were communicating in the clear, and that the data on their smartphones was not encrypted.
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/18/sign...-suspects/
Quote:The case for expanded surveillance of communications, however, is complicated by an analysis of recent terrorist attacks. The Intercept has reviewed 10 high-profile jihadi attacks carried out in Western countries between 2013 and 2015 (see below), and in each case some or all of the perpetrators were already known to the authorities before they executed their plot. In other words, most of the terrorists involved were not ghost operatives who sprang from nowhere to commit their crimes; they were already viewed as a potential threat, yet were not subjected to sufficient scrutiny by authorities under existing counterterrorism powers. Some of those involved in last week’s Paris massacre, for instance, were already known to authorities; at least three of the men appear to have been flagged at different times as having been radicalized, but warning signs were ignored.
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/18/terr...thorities/
Quote:But the reason there haven’t been any large-scale terror attacks by ISIS in the U.S. is not because they were averted by the intelligence community, but because — with the possible exception of one that was foiled by local police — none were actually planned.
And even before Snowden, the NSA wasn’t able to provide a single substantiated example of its surveillance dragnet preventing any domestic attack at all.
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/17/u-s-...den-leaks/
If you don't think Snowden could have gotten his point across without spelling out the how to's you sorely miss the point. He basically gave out our playbook. That's the problem I have with him. Stay in country. Release what you have to reporters and like minded politicians. If his cause was just he would have been exonerated. You celebrate a traitor.
The war on encryption will have the same result as the war on weeds that contain THC. Futility.
I also like how you guys go from 0 - 1000 mph.
Right to police state. If Snowden didn't have the document dump the Big Bad Govt. would be tapping my calls to grandma.
(11-18-2015 11:04 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]The anti-encryption people on this thread scare the hell out of me with their ignorance and their willingness to hand IMMENSE power to the government because of their ignorance.
Facts:
1) Encryption is a double edged sword. Duh. When you ask for the ability of the government to be able to break crypto, you are also BY DEFINITION simultaneously asking for global death of digital privacy. Your online banking transactions. Your conversations. Your social media. Your email. All of it would be not just subject to government snooping by the United States ... but eventually by criminals and foreign governments as well. The very nature of security will see to it that eventually the keys to the government backdoor are cracked, leaked, stolen, or similarly compromised. That is a global catastrophic security failure with no recovery. Given these realities ... terrorists and criminals having unbreakable crypto is a price I am willing to pay for EVERYBODY (including businesses, individuals, and allegedly "good" governments) to be able to have unbreakable crypto as well.
2) The crypto genie is out of the box. Implementing encryption control is like trying your hand at global gun control: good luck with that you naive peckerhead. Elliptic curve crypto is even stronger and on the near horizon in terms of widespread use. These are mathematical concepts known worldwide. Unless you've got a Men In Black memory pen we don't know about, you're living in a fantasy world thinking you'll be able to control encryption. All you'd be doing is destroying the privacy and security of the law abiding, while the terrorists and criminals salivate over their targets suddenly being unable to defend themselves.
3) Even if you were to magically break all worldwide crypto ... open source software advocates (FSF, OIN, Linux Foundation, etc), privacy advocates (EFF, etc), adversarial foreign powers (China, Russia, etc), and neutral foreign powers with strong privacy ethic (much of the EU) would create a new standard and throw away all of your work anyway.
My how far the "anti-war" left has come. We're less than a decade removed from Dubya can't do anything right, protests weekly over war, and rhetoric about the war being illegal and without a declaration. And now we've reached Obama can do no wrong with the same policies, no protests anywhere, who cares if war is declared, and hey ... let's eliminate encryption and all privacy for US citizens while we're at it.
YOU PEOPLE SCARE THE **** OUT OF ME.
"duh" was enough
can't fix idiots...
can't fix the internutz....
(11-19-2015 11:18 AM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]If you don't think Snowden could have gotten his point across without spelling out the how to's you sorely miss the point. He basically gave out our playbook. That's the problem I have with him. Stay in country. Release what you have to reporters and like minded politicians. If his cause was just he would have been exonerated. You celebrate a traitor.
I pretty much disagree with ALL of the implied premises above. But I am more interested in something else: How does it feel to come full circle and stand in lockstep with Dick Cheney?
As stated, the terrorists seemed to have used double-ROT-13, which is the pig latin of encryption protocols. Meaning, the messages were basically sent in the clear.
