Re: The Government's War on Encryption

From	"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	aus.computers
Subject	Re: The Government's War on Encryption
Date	2017-07-16 20:29 +1000
Message-ID	<et0th3Fqup1U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<okc8kb$111$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


"Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message 
news:okc8kb$111$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> A new law proposed by Turnbull appears to be aimed at undermining
> the security of all popular online services using encryption
> to secure user's data. Particularly those offering end-to-end
> encryption which ensures that even the service operators have
> no way of accessing data stored and transferred through their
> systems.
>
> It would seem that the war on terror has now branched out to
> begin a war on encryption.
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-14/facebook-google-to-be-forced-to-decrypt-messages-fight-terrorism/8707748
> - http://tinyurl.com/y7yto9z7
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-14/encryption-laws-australia-does-government-need-a-backdoor/8709654
> - http://tinyurl.com/yacb9gs9
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/14/new-law-would-force-facebook-and-google-to-give-police-access-to-encrypted-messages
> - http://tinyurl.com/y9dxj36d
>
> https://www.itnews.com.au/news/turnbull-govt-wants-to-force-companies-to-break-encryption-464861
> - http://tinyurl.com/yb7b4s6s
>
> The proposed law will apparantly force companies to create
> systems that allow government agencies access to the encrypted
> data trusted to them by their users. Malcolm Turnbull and
> Attorney-General George Brandis have both insisted that the
> law would not force companies to create backdoor vulnerabilities
> in their services, however have offered no explanation of how
> this can be avoided.
>
> Turnbull earlier commented on the government's plans while in
> London:
>
> https://www.itnews.com.au/news/turnbull-handballs-encryption-problem-to-tech-companies-468060
> - http://tinyurl.com/y73mgp8e
>
> Last year the UK introduced their "Investigatory Powers Act",
> which has similar aims:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/29/uk-government-encryption-whatsapp-investigatory-powers-act
> - http://tinyurl.com/k7vsfkm
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Act_2016
>
> In the plans of both countries, there is significant ambiguity
> as to how access is to be granted to government agencies. While
> the Australian government insists that they will not require
> backdoors to be added, Malcolm Turnbull's description of a
> backdoor (see first Guardian link above) is telling:
>
> "A back door is typically a flaw in a software program that
> perhaps the developer of the software program is not aware of,
> and that somebody who knows about it can exploit"
>
> "If there are flaws in software programs, obviously, that's why
> you get updates on your phone and your computer all the time.
> So we're not talking about that. We're talking about lawful
> access."
>
> So as far as he's concerned, backdoor vulnerabilities don't exist
> if the software developer is aware of them. There shouldn't be
> much worry about that if he's expecting them to implement those
> backdoors themselves.
>
> However conventionally a backdoor is exactly what is being
> proposed. It's a mechanism outside control of the user
> for accessing the encrypted data that may otherwise only be
> accessible to them, and whoever they might individually choose
> to share access with. Such a mechanism seriously undermines
> the advantages of end-to-end encryption, because an attacker
> no longer needs to learn the passwords of each individual user
> whose data they want to access. Instead they simply need to copy
> the method used by the government agencies to access that data,
> or to hack into the systems that the government agencies use
> themselves. This makes whatever system the technology companies
> use to implement the government's new demands for unencrypted
> access a huge target for hackers.
>
> While I personally don't feel under threat of being identified
> as a terrorist, paedophile, drug smuggler etc., I do expect to
> be able to use the most secure encryption methods publicly
> available in order to share information online that I don't want
> accessed by other members of the public. Unlike telephone and mail
> systems, the internet is an open network - users are only
> authenticated by the information they provide on every use. For
> this reason the system of data encryption, which is a reliable
> method of authenticating users, must be retained in its most
> secure form in order to ensure that the internet remains an
> appropriate system for all of the innumerable uses that have been
> found for it.
>
> With this in mind, I feel it should be asked:

> If terrorism enables the erosion of the
> capabilities offered by the internet,

Taint gunna happen, you watch.

> one of the key projects of the Western world in the 21st century,

20th, actually.

> has it not, to some extent, begun to win?

Nope.

And whatever that fool Turdbull wants, isnt going to happen.

There is no way that Apple will be providing anything that
allows govt to snoop on what you are doing and even if
they were that stupid, it completely trivial to ensure that
govt can't do that, whatever legislation govt produces.

Its all just more mindless piss and wind from pollys.

Back to aus.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-15 05:19 +0000
  The Government's War on Encryption jonz <johnhhhinton7@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 05:27 -0700
  Re: The Government's War on Encryption Jeßus <j@j.net> - 2017-07-16 08:49 +1000
  Re: The Government's War on Encryption SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2017-07-16 10:46 +1000
    Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-16 01:49 +0000
      Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 01:33 +1000
  Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 20:29 +1000
    Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-16 23:17 +0000
      Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:23 +1000
        Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-19 23:13 +0000
          Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 20:39 +1000
            Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-20 23:04 +0000
              Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-23 02:31 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-23 00:10 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-23 11:14 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-23 23:10 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-24 11:13 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-25 23:10 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 15:23 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-26 23:18 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 13:05 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-27 23:01 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 10:24 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-28 22:40 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-29 10:54 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-30 01:46 +0000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-07-24 19:08 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-07-25 23:12 +0000
    Re: The Government's War on Encryption Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-07-16 19:27 -0500
      Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:30 +1000
        Re: The Government's War on Encryption Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-07-20 06:33 -0500
          Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 05:49 +1000
          Re: The Government's War on Encryption keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-07-21 16:27 +1000
            Re: The Government's War on Encryption Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2017-07-22 08:28 +1000
            Re: The Government's War on Encryption Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-07-26 06:32 -0500
              Re: The Government's War on Encryption keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-07-26 21:58 +1000
                Re: The Government's War on Encryption Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-07-30 02:53 -0500
    Re: The Government's War on Encryption Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 11:01 +1000
      Re: The Government's War on Encryption "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:31 +1000

csiph-web