Senator McCain Calls For End-To-End Encryption Ban In US

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
To summarize, remove encryption from business because you can enforce it easily and leaving companies more vulnerable than today. Lets just let Chinese gvt hackers right in and build these "back doors" that no one other than the "good guys" will find...ROFL WTF I don't know how he plans on stopping terrorists from working on their own devices and encrypting them... Its takes minutes to install an app and start chatting encrypted or to encrypt your phone. There are so many different levels and types of encryption and he sees it as a scary blanket term that terrorists use to hide from the US. Too bad YOU CANT STOP MATH Mc Cain.

I am guessing Mc Cain needs a rotary dial app on his phone just so he can use it.
 
I don't understand the reasoning here. Even if they stop companies from using end-to-end encryption what is there in place to stop the terrorists from creating their own encryption programs? I doubt it would even take someone with enough tech savvy very long to come up with a way that would circumvent this and protect themselves. They are probably already doing this just out of shear paranoia. This only seems to expose legitimate companies to possible spying.
 
What security is threatened? Spell it out please, and provide examples where something was actually prevented by having access to someone's private data. "Our security is threatened" is a rather nebulous thing, more to spread fear than being actually productive.

End to end encryption overall is good for both personal and national security. No backdoors means there is nothing to hack into for either good guys or bad guys. And last time I checked, the bad guys are pretty adept at getting into things.

So the US gets their backdoor, all rosy just for them. Then China demands one, followed by say India. Who and how do you tell someone they can't have a backdoor once the camels nose is under the tent?

Not to mention economic harm to American tech companies trying to sell their products overseas.
 
yep ban it cuz then terrorists are just gonna have to use hotmail! McCain also tried to ban MLK day from being a day off. dude is so awesome
 
Banning end to end encryption basically means that all eCommerce would be impossible. Is McCain just out of touch or is he losing his mind? This idea that it's possible to build in back doors but keep data secure is a fallacy. It's all or nothing and if this sort of thing goes into law I see all large Internet businesses relocating to other jurisdictions.
 
This is rich! The same guy who can't see why open and uncontrolled borders are dangerous wants government to be able access private citizens' files because of security. All these jerks care about is power, not security--and certainly not us. Disgusted he is my Senator.
 
I think you all misread the article. Encryption can still be used, the companies just have to make the key available on request. As long as that requires a court order...I have no issue.
I suspect most of you would be the 1st to whine, "Why didn't you KNOW this would happen? Why didn't you STOP it?" When all along the intelligence was there...ENCRYPTED. Just like ISIS wants it!
 
I appreciate it when politicians take such a strong stance on encryption. Because when they want to ban it, it makes it just so simple for me to decide that I'll never vote for them, ever.
 
Providing such a back door to a government is, imho, a significant reason Blackberry lost its relevance and is still wriggling in its death throes. McCain, a parasite who produces nothing of value, would not understand this. Any other thoughts I have on this subject are too un-Moderator-like to post. This article seems a little ill-advised, although it may serve as a warning to all of us.
[/grapes]
 
The senator has no idea what he is talking about. Encryption is a basic function required by all forms of electronic commerce and corporate communications. This sort of stupidity makes me wonder what the hell republicans are doing these days.
 
I think you all misread the article. Encryption can still be used, the companies just have to make the key available on request. As long as that requires a court order...I have no issue.
I suspect most of you would be the 1st to whine, "Why didn't you KNOW this would happen? Why didn't you STOP it?" When all along the intelligence was there...ENCRYPTED. Just like ISIS wants it!
Click to expand...

Homie, what happens when a hacker steals the keys that are all conveniently located in one place?
 
I think you all misread the article. Encryption can still be used, the companies just have to make the key available on request. As long as that requires a court order...I have no issue.
I suspect most of you would be the 1st to whine, "Why didn't you KNOW this would happen? Why didn't you STOP it?" When all along the intelligence was there...ENCRYPTED. Just like ISIS wants it!
Click to expand...

If there is a key that government can use, then any other party or organization can use that key... It is like forcing all people to hide their house keys under the doormat. It is not safe!

And yes it is very easy to get encrypting from somewhere else, if USA would not allow it. It does not work. The government can tap phone lines, WiFi network or use other kind of electronic spying equipment and so on.
The technology is out there. The djinn is out of bottle, you can not force it back and hope that no one will newer release it again.
It is much better to cope the situation and make the best of it!
 


trouble is that it does not require a court order. the last set of rules they passed made this clear. they also took all liability away from companies for providing info. this means you can no longer go after them for giving up your data without a court order. you got to put all the pieces together and realize they actually have real time access to anything and everything collected on you by anyone. all they are missing is the encrypted data on your smartphone and tablet. so now they want access to that as well.

the numerous times the agencies have been asked by congress to produce examples of when any of this data being unavailable to them has gotten in the way of them doing their job, they have not been able to provide a single example. sadly people like mcain know nothing about what they are talking about and like everything else they go simply by bumper sticker twitter length anecdotes they parade as fact. the NSA knows what it is talking about and they have said numerous times (as stated in this article) that not getting at this data is unimportant and means little to them. the fbi on the other hand that only wants to increase it's power base also knows this but presses it anyway to make their other work easier.

remember that access to all this data has helped the fbi make all kinds of drug and internet crime arrests over the last few years. they want to make this easier so they throw out the "terrorists can use it" nonsense to get it passed. it will help them in these investigations for sure but won't make a difference in any kind of terrorism probe.
 
I think you all misread the article. Encryption can still be used, the companies just have to make the key available on request. As long as that requires a court order...I have no issue.
I suspect most of you would be the 1st to whine, "Why didn't you KNOW this would happen? Why didn't you STOP it?" When all along the intelligence was there...ENCRYPTED. Just like ISIS wants it!
Click to expand...

If the key is stored at the company, then sooner or later hackers will get ahold of it, then your data isn't secure anymore.

There is no such thing as a backdoor that only "the good guys" can use.
 


I don't think they can. Companies are private entities, even the ones run by board members or stock holders are a private entity. That would be the same as saying that the government can have access to everything without need for a warrant in your home (personal property).

It is the government overstepping their boundaries again. I am all for keeping the ones I care about safe from possible threats but this is not the way to go about it.

I like McCain in the idea that he supports his stats (Arizona where I live) and heavily supports the military and National Guard who give their lives and time to help keep us safe which I feel is important but he is dead wrong on this. Encryption is important in protecting not only data but very sensitive data such as CC numbers, SSNs etc.

I hope to GabeN that this gets thrown out.
 
It's another one of those "if law abiding citizens don't have x then the bad guys won't have x" ideas. It's bad policy to cripple your own capability in hopes that the bad guys will have to play by your rules.
 
Because McDonalds exployees in the US are backing and training ISIS operatives, right guys? Guys?
I foresee US IT companies being a thing of the past. Crappy internet coupled with these moronic decisions. Ban McBean instead. Pea-brain.
 
I think you all misread the article. Encryption can still be used, the companies just have to make the key available on request. As long as that requires a court order...I have no issue.
I suspect most of you would be the 1st to whine, "Why didn't you KNOW this would happen? Why didn't you STOP it?" When all along the intelligence was there...ENCRYPTED. Just like ISIS wants it!
Click to expand...

If the key is stored at the company, then sooner or later hackers will get ahold of it, then your data isn't secure anymore.

There is no such thing as a backdoor that only "the good guys" can use.
Click to expand...

To clarify, this is not a "key under the mat" issue. If a decrypt key gets stolen, you just get a new cert. Let's Encrypt is pushing to make 90-day certs commonplace, and for good reason: once those 90 days are up, it doesn't matter who has your root cert. Just like if you're keylogged and the kiddie tries to use your password in a month, but you change often, they won't get it.

I think heavy encryption should be a selling point for companies. Imagine if your ISP decided they would encrypt all your traffic for you leaving your local distribution hub? Sure, you could encrypt it first then let them re-encrypt, that's your choice, but it would make your data safer going through their network (if it's being sniffed for instance) until it pops out of their network. Default requests for https, or even better: agreements with various companies or networks (AWS, Google, etc) to hand off encrypted data to them of all types, not just https/etc so the data is encrypted through as much of the web as possible.
 
that would be nice but clearly that is exactly what the government is trying to prevent since they sniff everything that goes by already. this is exactly what this article is talking about known as "end to end" encryption. the gov wants to ban this so they can sniff the data as it roams the internet once it leaves your pc.

i have stated before and will again. the bad guys already encrypt their data before sending to avoid the sniffing so there is no way to intercept it after it leaves the computer. this is what the gov is trying to use as a reason to ban end to end. as if the bad guys depend on google to encrypt their data for them. all you do is prevent the average citizen from having any privacy since the bad guys they are after already work around the snooping in place and have since i was in that world. i left the intel world in 2005 and we already knew they were encrypting their data back then. it has not changed since then with the added snooping we are doing. remember the patriot act started the snooping and that was in place by oct of 2001. by jan 2002, the bad guys already knew about it and adjusted. only took a couple air strikes and lost leaders for them to figure out how the info was found out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom