Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.computer.security > #5698 > unrolled thread

"Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017

Back to article view | Back to alt.computer.security

Contents

  "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-22 23:43 +0100
    Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net> - 2016-01-22 19:11 -0800
      Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 00:01 -0500
        Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-24 07:34 +0100
          Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net> - 2016-01-24 08:45 -0800
            Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:52 -0500
          Re: "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017 Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:49 -0500

#5698 — "Progressive" black California democrat lawmaker wants to ban phone encryption in 2017

The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk 
to prosecute a few pimps.

http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/

http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png

California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has 
introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile 
devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017. 
The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1, 
2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its 
manufacturer or its operating system provider." Should this bill 
become law, manufacturers found in violation would be subject to 
fines of $2,500 per phone.

Cooper's reasoning puts a novel spin on the same, tired "The 
police can't do their jobs unless tech companies do it for them" 
argument. This time, he used human trafficking as the boogeyman 
that needs defeating and which can only be accomplished if the 
government has unfettered, disk-level access to its citizens' 
cell phones.

"If you're a bad guy [we] can get a search record for your bank, 
for your house, you can get a search warrant for just about 
anything," Cooper told ArsTechnica. "For the industry to say 
it's privacy, it really doesn't hold any water. We're going 
after human traffickers and people who are doing bad and evil 
things. Human trafficking trumps privacy, no ifs, ands, or buts 
about it." Apparently human trafficking also trumps the 4th 
Amendment as well.

Comments:

BoBoDev34 minutes ago
Score one for liberal state making "liberal" decisions.
00ReplyFlag

BiAryabout 8 hours ago
The legal system is broken, and this is a proof...
You do know that Law Enforcement are notorious for spinning 
facts to fit any theory they have, now imagine if they can 
cherry pick personal data ?!!
Now they can pretty much accuse anyone of anything...i guarantee 
you that i can find something incriminating in ANYONE'S data...i 
am even willing to take a bet on it..anyone?
+50ReplyFlag

JerzeyLegendabout 8 hours ago
I understand the frustration here, but I think everyone is kind 
of over-reacting. It says the ban will be on phones which have 
encryption on by default. It is not asking to remove encryption 
all together. Although it says it requires phones to be able to 
be decrypted.
So once you purchase your phone, simply enable encryption. I 
think they are hoping that they'd catch the idiots who would not 
enable it.

However, all this is going to be irrelevant as this will simply 
create a larger atmosphere for 3rd party encryption. Also I 
don't think many corporations would appreciate the police having 
access to sensitive data that will be on many people's work 
phones.
0-2ReplyFlag

utilitybeltabout 14 hours ago
This guy can go to hell. Fund the police so they can afford a 
cryptographer if access to private data is that important.
+50ReplyFlag

dragonherderabout 15 hours ago
This isn't really about trumping 4th amendment rights. You have 
the right to privacy, but that only extends so far. During a 
criminal investigation your right to privacy is diminished by 
federal law (which has been in place forever) and warrants are 
issued, they can search anything they get a warrant for and if 
your phone happens to be something that is used in you illegal 
activities and they have a high enough belief that it does and 
are able to convince a judge of this you get a search warrant 
based around law that trumps the fourth amendment in these 
specific cases...

This isn't blanket "ohh we wan't to spy on everyone" stuff...
0-5ReplyFlag

batukhanabout 11 hours ago
Yes but this is about technical security. You either do the 
encryption right and have only one key do the decryption, or you 
implement a backdoor and in 2018 there will be a data breach and 
20 million people have their phones hacked.
+20

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#5699

"Nomen Nescio"  wrote in message 
news:6b9294c39655df58b4dbd930f5e7e773@dizum.com...

>The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk
>to prosecute a few pimps.

>http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
>ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/

>http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
>305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png

>California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has
>introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile
>devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017.
>The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1,
>2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its
>manufacturer or its operating system provider."

Are we sure this isn't the same legislator who thought that Guam might tip 
over with too much movement of people? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5700

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 19:11:08 -0800, "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net>
wrote:

>
>
>"Nomen Nescio"  wrote in message 
>news:6b9294c39655df58b4dbd930f5e7e773@dizum.com...
>
>>The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk
>>to prosecute a few pimps.
>
>>http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
>>ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/
>
>>http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
>>305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png
>
>>California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has
>>introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile
>>devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017.
>>The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1,
>>2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its
>>manufacturer or its operating system provider."
>
>Are we sure this isn't the same legislator who thought that Guam might tip 
>over with too much movement of people? 

No.

"Claim:   During a House committee meeting, Rep. Hank Johnson said he
feared that stationing 8,000 Marines on Guam would cause the island to
"become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize." 
	TRUE"
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/guamtip.asp

Swill
-- 
Beam Me Up Scotty has been exposed as a 
never ending stream of contradictions

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5701

In article <jkm8abhi036j8sq88imr9cooethgcimftr@4ax.com>
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 19:11:08 -0800, "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"Nomen Nescio"  wrote in message
> >news:6b9294c39655df58b4dbd930f5e7e773@dizum.com...
> >
> >>The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk
> >>to prosecute a few pimps.
> >
> >>http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
> >>ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/
> >
> >>http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
> >>305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png
> >
> >>California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has
> >>introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile
> >>devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017.
> >>The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1,
> >>2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its
> >>manufacturer or its operating system provider."
> >
> >Are we sure this isn't the same legislator who thought that Guam might tip
> >over with too much movement of people?
>
> No.
>
> "Claim:   During a House committee meeting, Rep. Hank Johnson said he
> feared that stationing 8,000 Marines on Guam would cause the island to
> "become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize."
> 	TRUE"
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/guamtip.asp

Even a democrat couldn't be that dumb.  Oh wait.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5702

"Anonymous"  wrote in message 
news:69a0390dd24095c6b56b7b1eeb7b1ac0@hoi-polloi.org...

In article <jkm8abhi036j8sq88imr9cooethgcimftr@4ax.com>
Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 19:11:08 -0800, "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"Nomen Nescio"  wrote in message
> >news:6b9294c39655df58b4dbd930f5e7e773@dizum.com...
> >
> >>The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk
> >>to prosecute a few pimps.
> >
> >>http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
> >>ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/
> >
> >>http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
> >>305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png
> >
> >>California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has
> >>introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile
> >>devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017.
> >>The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1,
> >>2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its
> >>manufacturer or its operating system provider."
> >
> >Are we sure this isn't the same legislator who thought that Guam might 
> >tip
> >over with too much movement of people?
>
> No.
>
> "Claim:   During a House committee meeting, Rep. Hank Johnson said he
> feared that stationing 8,000 Marines on Guam would cause the island to
> "become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize."
> TRUE"
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/guamtip.asp

# Even a democrat couldn't be that dumb.  Oh wait.

Yes indeed.  I know it wasn't Cooper who made the Guam comment, but it is a 
typically stupid democrat comment similar to the lunatic rantings of Rep. 
Sheila Jackson Lee. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5705

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 08:45:10 -0800, "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net>
wrote:

>Yes indeed.  I know it wasn't Cooper who made the Guam comment, but it is a 
>typically stupid democrat comment similar to the lunatic rantings of Rep. 
>Sheila Jackson Lee. 

Or Kay Bailey Hutchison who, when Clinton was President said,
"Willful, corrupt, and false sworn testimony before a Federal grand
jury is a separate and distinct crime under applicable law and is
material and perjurious if it is `capable' of influencing the grand
jury in any matter before it, including any collateral matters that it
may consider. See, Title 18, Section 1623, U.S. Code, and Federal
court cases interpreting that Section.  The President's testimony
before the Federal grand jury was fully capable of influencing the
grand jury's investigation and was clearly perjurious."

But when Bush was President, said, "I certainly hope that if there is
going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an
indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they
couldn't indict on the crime so they go to something just to show that
their two years of investigation were not a waste of time and
dollars."

Swill
-- 
Beam Me Up Scotty has been exposed as a 
never ending stream of contradictions

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5704

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 07:34:34 +0100, Anonymous
<anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> wrote:

>In article <jkm8abhi036j8sq88imr9cooethgcimftr@4ax.com>
>Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 19:11:08 -0800, "Wayne" <mygarbagecan@verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"Nomen Nescio"  wrote in message
>> >news:6b9294c39655df58b4dbd930f5e7e773@dizum.com...
>> >
>> >>The bill would put every Californian's digital security at risk
>> >>to prosecute a few pimps.
>> >
>> >>http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/21/california-lawmaker-wants-to-
>> >>ban-phone-encryption-in-2017/
>> >
>> >>http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/883c8e8e479c86904d867a63dc
>> >>305962/203296030/Screen+Shot+2016-01-21+at+1.22.04+PM.png
>> >
>> >>California lawmaker, State Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), has
>> >>introduced a bill that would effectively ban the sale of mobile
>> >>devices that have encryption on by default beginning in 2017.
>> >>The bill, AB 1681, demands that any phone sold after January 1,
>> >>2017 be "capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its
>> >>manufacturer or its operating system provider."
>> >
>> >Are we sure this isn't the same legislator who thought that Guam might tip
>> >over with too much movement of people?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> "Claim:   During a House committee meeting, Rep. Hank Johnson said he
>> feared that stationing 8,000 Marines on Guam would cause the island to
>> "become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize."
>> 	TRUE"
>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/guamtip.asp
>
>Even a democrat couldn't be that dumb.  Oh wait.

That's the problem with American politics.  Neither party has a lock
on hubris, ignorance or stupidity.  Rep Johnson appears to be guilty
of at least two of those.

I'm reminded of Sen Stevens who once described the Internet as a
"series of tubes".  *sigh*

Swill
-- 
Beam Me Up Scotty has been exposed as a 
never ending stream of contradictions

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.computer.security

csiph-web