FBI wants backdoor to all software

[Schrankwand]

Sounds totally illegal to me, maybe someone in a position of authority should tell them no.  Next they will want a key to every locked physical door.

They have, they call that  a "warrant"

[threeip]

Sounds totally illegal to me, maybe someone in a position of authority should tell them no.  Next they will want a key to every locked physical door.

Or everyone's cellphone records

[TheKoziTwo]

So effectively this backdoor will have to be added not only to software created and distributed within the US, but internationally, otherwise one cannot sell/provide software to US customers.

[Lauda]

I can see hackers taking advantage of this.. it's a no no.

[bitzox]

open source ftw!

[Schrankwand]

So effectively this backdoor will have to be added not only to software created and distributed within the US, but internationally, otherwise one cannot sell/provide software to US customers.

Exactly.

And with guys like a certain Google Employee that just LOVES to embarass companies through exploits...

Well, let us see ships going down. I wonder what companies like SilentCircle would be doing then. I mean, they do provide their service to military contractors and servicemen of the United States... adding a backdoor there would compromise security.

[wolverine.ks]

this is excellent news. it means there will soon be another reason to switch to open source for users and another reason for companies to switch to open source as well.

economic reasons are more powerful than moral reasons. so it appears that this will be a big boon to the open source community.

of you are a developer of open source, you should support this effort as it will help eliminate your competition.

just make sure you are using open source software and encryption for all communications so you aren't swept up like a dolphin in a tuna fish net.

[Razick]

So, basically they want a backdoor. Within no time, hackers will crack it and they will whine about it...


But I suggest giving them the backdoor. I suggest using encrypted communication and simply leaking them the whole communication. Get it delivered to their doorstep. And then let them have fun cracking AES.

that is how apple does it and lately I heard an amusing story of complaint, since Apple acted in a security request and delivered the data from Apple imessage or how it is called. Of course, encrypted. And said "We don't have the means to encrypt this, but as you asked, here is the data you requested." "We can't read this." "Neither can we."

+1

[Razick]

So wrong.

This is why we need bitmessage. Check out my thread and add your address.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226770.0

[leopard2]

Good luck with that in the open source age.

Sometimes there is a difference between what you want and what you get. Sick Bastards.

[leopard2]

It really isn't just that most of us are lazy (believe me we are) its that we don't have real alternatives.

Are you locked up in some institution? There is a libertarian party, even as a non-US person I know that. And in many countries there is a pirate party. If people don't vote those, they get what they deserve.

Of course the large parties are all the same, their "politicians" are actors and they are performing quite well.

[niko]

I would be absolutely happy with backdoor access to all electronic communications, with the caveat that access must also be allowed by all citizens to all government and corporate communications.
In fact, not just the citizens should be granted access, but anyone on Earth potentially impacted by any action of government and corporations.

[Raoul Duke]

Only closed source software I use is made by Russian and Chinese. Should I worry? About the FBI, that is...

[franky1]

this is only an issue for closed source software, but i think that instead of just allowing any call to be listened into the software providers should program a key into each internet call or each username. and only release this key when FBI produce a warrant showing that they have good reason to listen into username XYZ123.

for instance with telephone systems it should have been set that a phone company only releases recordings or access to a specific persons phone line on production of a warrant that stipulates a time-frame of x hours/day/weeks they are allowed access. and not just a open gateway to listen into anyone, any time for however long they like.

some countries say they have these laws inplace, but telephone/software companies just gave full access and hoped the government agencies would self regulate their actions to only access calls when there is good evidence to do so. which then allowed the authorities to side step certain laws by making up evidence and require only their chief/supervisor to authorise the snooping in.

this is almost as bad as allowing the government to have a key vut of your house doors, microphones fitted in the home and also access to your bank account.

im glad im not american.. the land of the free.........

[bitzox]

It really isn't just that most of us are lazy (believe me we are) its that we don't have real alternatives.

Are you locked up in some institution? There is a libertarian party, even as a non-US person I know that. And in many countries there is a pirate party. If people don't vote those, they get what they deserve.

That's a great idea and in an idealistically pure country it would work. but realistically even if the libertarian party got 20% of the vote the republicrats and demicans would just unify on all things freedom and security related. So what you are talking about is a party, coming out of nowhere, getting at least 51% of the vote for the president and in both houses of congress. Even then the judicial branch will be against you until enough judges die off to be replaced. If you think 51% care enough about freedom from warentless searches in ANY COUNTRY you are super idealistic. Most people have been conditioned to trade freedom for "security" the median and out political system encourage it. It has nothing to do with the people who realize how evil our government is acting but everything to do with all the less than intelligent people who couldn't care less.

[Mike Christ]

That's a great idea and in an idealistically pure country it would work. but realistically even if the libertarian party got 20% of the vote the republicrats and demicans would just unify on all things freedom and security related. So what you are talking about is a party, coming out of nowhere, getting at least 51% of the vote for the president and in both houses of congress. Even then the judicial branch will be against you until enough judges die off to be replaced. If you think 51% care enough about freedom from warentless searches in ANY COUNTRY you are super idealistic. Most people have been conditioned to trade freedom for "security" the median and out political system encourage it. It has nothing to do with the people who realize how evil our government is acting but everything to do with all the less than intelligent people who couldn't care less.

That's the issue we're facing.  People still want to play the game, and when they realize they can't win, they don't stop playing the game, they just fold their arms and huff and say, "Well, we can't win, so why bother trying?"

So anyway, those who are winning at the game are also in control of public education, so it's taught that if you don't play the game, you're some kind of freak, an anarchist, and a terrorist, probably communist, and likely a witch.  Get them while they're young and they're much more likely to stick with you forever; just look at how successful those religious have been at this.  We still have grown men who believe in fairy tales; it's all they know.  Same goes for government; if you don't know the alternative, you can't solve the problem, or even be aware of what the problem is, you only ever see the ragged ends of the problem's tentacles but never see the core of the problem, so you try to change things within the game but you never really solve a problem, you only improve your own condition and make it worse for someone else.

The point isn't to get a Libertarian into office.  The point is to help society understand why the game of state and politics only works against them.  Understanding the difference is what separates the men from the sheep, as is common to say nowadays; people must learn to educate themselves, which is exactly what is avoided in public school, and exactly what we push on the Internet.  I have little hope for the generations before the dawn of the Internet, but high hopes for those who've spent most of their lives with it.  Luckily, people don't live forever.

[TheFootMan]

How to get a backdoor to the FBI ?

1. Find out were some female agents work.
2. Court them and get at least 1 to become your gf, or the lover for a night.
3. ? Profit ?


 

[Raoul Duke]

How to get a backdoor to the FBI ?

1. Find out were some female agents work.
2. Court them and get at least 1 to become your gf, or the lover for a night.
3. ? Profit ?


 

Fuck the backdoor... I would just enjoy the back orifice

[bitzox]

The point isn't to get a Libertarian into office.  The point is to help society understand why the game of state and politics only works against them.  Understanding the difference is what separates the men from the sheep, as is common to say nowadays; people must learn to educate themselves, which is exactly what is avoided in public school, and exactly what we push on the Internet.  I have little hope for the generations before the dawn of the Internet, but high hopes for those who've spent most of their lives with it.  Luckily, people don't live forever.

I couldn't agree with you more. I was simply trying to argue the point that under the current geo-political system it is pretty much impossible to see meaningful change. An argument you have articulated much more eloquently. When I spoke of a lack of meaningful alternatives I meant within the system, revolution is always a meaningful alternative, just not one many people are willing to accept as a first course of action.

[porticol]

The point isn't to get a Libertarian into office.  The point is to help society understand why the game of state and politics only works against them.  Understanding the difference is what separates the men from the sheep, as is common to say nowadays; people must learn to educate themselves, which is exactly what is avoided in public school, and exactly what we push on the Internet.  I have little hope for the generations before the dawn of the Internet, but high hopes for those who've spent most of their lives with it.  Luckily, people don't live forever.

I couldn't agree with you more. I was simply trying to argue the point that under the current geo-political system it is pretty much impossible to see meaningful change. An argument you have articulated much more eloquently. When I spoke of a lack of meaningful alternatives I meant within the system, revolution is always a meaningful alternative, just not one many people are willing to accept as a first course of action.

If I remember at last election Congress had about a 25% approval rating. All but a few seats remained the same after the election.

If everyone had voted for their individual member how they felt about Congress, every seat would have changed. They'd pick up pretty quickly that they need to pull their head in. But people didn't: they thought everyone else should make a change, it's not their (representative's) fault. When anyone grumbles as to how useless Congress is, I ask them if they voted for the incumbent in the last election.

People if they can assemble have the power to fire every politician and give someone else a chance. If they don't perform, fire them as well. Keep going until they're working for the people. Idealistic maybe, but this is where things should be, and I believe can be.