Security Experts React Negatively To Burr-Feinstein Anti-Encryption Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
SO two people who have no idea how invaluable encryption is, nor do they probably even understand what it is really used for call for it to not be used?

Gotta love politics. People making decisions on things they have no real understanding of.
 

jeremy2020

Distinguished
May 12, 2011
73
0
18,630
0
SO two people who have no idea how invaluable encryption is, nor do they probably even understand what it is really used for call for it to not be used?

Gotta love politics. People making decisions on things they have no real understanding of.
How invaluable encryption is? They don't *what* encryption is...what the internet is...what a computer is..
 

Jay E

Reputable
Jan 6, 2016
8
0
4,510
0
Feinstein is one of the most ridiculous politicians ever. If you think this is bad. You should see her on gun control.
 

tamalero

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2006
892
0
18,980
0
SO two people who have no idea how invaluable encryption is, nor do they probably even understand what it is really used for call for it to not be used?

Gotta love politics. People making decisions on things they have no real understanding of.
I actually why old hags who have absolutely no knowledge of technology.. are the ones drafting these kind of bills.
Kinda reminds me of how males who have absolutely no experience in pregnancy or being a woman.. are the ones doing anti women legislation to control women bodies.
 

Virtual_Singularity

Respectable
Feb 18, 2016
461
0
1,960
57


Tragically, they needn't know the least about what they're sponsoring or voting on. It's not their ideas or the will or interests of the people they promote. When it comes to bills like this one, they take their direction from those who quietly lobby on behalf of the moneyed interests which constitute the powers that be.

Feinstien, Burr, McConnel, McCain, and many others of the senate repubs (dems too) will likely end up co-sponsoring and/or voting for this anti-constitutional abomination. Same as they did when they voted for TPP. The names above are few among many in the senate who are living, breathing examples of what Cicero meant by his quote on treason made so long ago. Same goes for many reps as well, on both sides of the aisle.

Some may think this bill has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. Many Britons likely thought the same, and yet the sweeping legislation there depriving UK citizens/businesses of any semblance of privacy continues to proceed unabated. The same could happen here in the US. Those who'd like to say they at least did their part to oppose this bill should phone your senators and reps and impress upon them why it or any similar bill in the future should not be passed.
 

gggplaya

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2011
765
26
19,020
1
Diane was born before computers existed, She will kick the bucket soon.
I hate feinstein, she's an old hypocritical crow that knows nothing about technology, yet somehow ends up on these committees. She's sponsored other bills without actually knowing how the objects she's against even operate. She's always trying to make a name for herself.
 
First Gun Control. Now Encryption control. You really thing that by denying things like this to the people will stop terrorist, rapist, murders, criminals? Hell no. You can take things off the App store/Play store but people can still Root/Jailbreak their phone and side load apps. They can ban encryption all together but that won't help or stop anyone who want it to use it. Where there is a will there is a way. That is the thing they really don't understand and that by taking the things that protect us away it leaves us more vulnerable than ever.
 

hellwig

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
1,743
0
19,860
26
SO two people who have no idea how invaluable encryption is, nor do they probably even understand what it is really used for call for it to not be used?

Gotta love politics. People making decisions on things they have no real understanding of.
These two might not even own a smart phone, and the only thing their computer does is eMail (and we don't encrypt email, do we? It's stuck in my machine, bad guys can't get to it!).

They think about things in older terms. For instance, if you printed out your emails and stored them in a safe, the government can currently compel you give them the key (or they'll crack it). So, because you don't print out your emails like most octogenarians, the government can't access them as easily, and that's not fair!

Reminds me of an interview with a senator who shot-down legislation to reduce ATM fees. He later admitted he'd never even used an ATM and didn't know that the fees were for. This is our US government folks!
 

spiketheaardvark

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2009
113
1
18,710
7
Would some one remind these people that the same tech that lets us safely impulse buy things off of Amazon without some stealing our credit card numbers, or someone hacking into the computers at a powerplant, or the plans to the pentagon's newest toy every single day, is the same tech they are trying to break because they think the only thing it protects is terrorist and cat videos?
 


They completely understand the real effect these bills. They might not know how the technology works, but they know that vulnerable people are easier to control. They have no problem making the people into sheep among the wolves, so long as they aren't one of the sheep themselves.
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
2,344
0
19,960
50
don't really care, too many muslim jihadis have been imported into every civilized nation in the world, the apple incident proved the government needs to regulate commerce alot tighter, thank apple for that.
the u.s. constitution affords the government the right to invade any privacy in situations where the public at large becomes endangered and even habeas corpus gets suspended.

the american government has the right to regulate commerce if that means a ban on encryption software or devices, then it's 100% legal and their right to do so.
now if we the people don't like it, we craft our own bill petition it around and with enough signatures force it down our senators and house of representatives throats, and that's how it works.
telephone communications are not encrypted, call up your phone company, they can confirm this.
i get the whole point of this in so many ways it's not funny, the government got their work arounds for " shall not " in the bill of rights they applied it to weapons, and a whole plethora of other things that's unbelievable and no one bothered to stop the government on the other issues except for the confederate states of america in states rights. (yes they were 100% legal in their rights and assertions and their actions to leave, however there is nothing in the constitution that said we couldn't attack a foreign nation and take them over, and outside of a court of law and under oath, every one is allowed to lie especially politicians the people writing the history boos and teachers.)

regular telephone is not encrypted yet i hear no complaints. i don't have anything to hide out side of work.

given the history of islam and it's 1400 years of jihad i'm willing to write a constitutional amendment that excludes islam from the bill of rights. 15-25% of a 1.5 billion population that uses violence as conversion or elimination is not something to play around with like a toy, that's more than the population of north america or europe combined.

i can already hear the complaints and arguments and i will already say this " and how many jews forced germany to convert or executed germans for refusing "
there's a huge difference of what's going on the KKK is very comparable to islam in their goals and methods, islam however goes exponentially beyond what the KKK does. this is going to sound like defending the KKK, i know; but when the KKK went after a negro, they went after one who raped, or robbed or murdered, and they lynched the negro. that was an actual crime, when the muslims go after some one they do it for the same reasons, plus more, however, in refusing to convert to islam, or bad mouthing islam, they kill you for it, literally. i realize there are some converted muslims or muslims who preach peace in effort to convert, however i've read the qu'urans from iran, egypt, saudi arabia, yemen, qutar, syria, turkey and lebanon.
they all have their variances when it comes to this imam or that caliphate historical words, however muhammeds words are always the same, and the only one true islam is the islam muhammed taught, all others are false and subject in muhammeds teachings to slay them where ever they are found. all of muhammed followers in his life time practiced islam as muhammed taught them, and muhammeds teachings taught them conquering was power and wealth and glory to allah, farming & working was dhimmi and kafir work and non muslim lives don't matter, no matter what.

i don't like democrats or republicans but this is dead on right:
President George W. Bush, in an address to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001 said, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."[7]

as for the rest of the world.... they are national socialists, communists, or dictatorships, they do as they please and everything is about government rights, the people have only what their government gives them, and it's subject to what ever is only good for the government/leadership.

i don't care about the rest of the world or the people of the rest of the world, they like their government, other wise they would over throw it and make a better one.
 

Virtual_Singularity

Respectable
Feb 18, 2016
461
0
1,960
57


I don't even know where to begin addressing your comment. You don't seem to grasp the concept of controlled opposition. You rightfully complain about extremism, and imply a complaint regarding terrorists entering our country, yet seem oblivious to why an administration would allow them to enter our nation without vetting them to begin with. You quote Bush, and seem to support his uncompromising "you're either with us or against us" (bully the rest of the world into submission) stance. You say the rest of the world is full of national socialists or dictatorships yet fail to recognize what is taking shape in our own country.

I won't continue, but I'll repeat the words of one of our wiser founding fathers, that you hopefully gain some insight from them: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Point being, those willing to make such a trade will, ultimately, gain neither, and lose both.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS