Planet Sys. Admin System Administration, Information Technology, Information Security. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein gave a speech recently calling for Responsible Encryption aka. Crypto Backdoors. Our services have been closed. Thank you for your understanding Download the free trial version below to get started. Doubleclick the downloaded file to install the software. Most Downloaded Files. Microsoft Office 2016 Professional Plus Crack x86x64 The 1st on Net Microsoft Office 2016 Professional 16. 460,645 views. Horse racing Ice hockey Karate Olympics Racing Motorsport Asian Games or Asiad are a multisport event taking place every four years among the athletes from all. Windows 2013. Its full of dangerous ideas that need to be debunked. The importance of law enforcement. The first third of the speech talks about the importance of law enforcement, as if its the only thing standing between us and chaos. It cites the 2. 01. Mirai attacks as an example of the chaos that will only get worse without stricter law enforcement. But the Mira case demonstrated the opposite, how law enforcement is not needed. They made no arrests in the case. A year later, they still havent a clue who did it. Conversely, we technologists have fixed the major infrastructure issues. Specifically, those affected by the DNS outage have moved to multiple DNS providers, including a high capacity DNS provider like Google and Amazon who can handle such large attacks easily. In other words, we the people fixed the major Mirai problem, and law enforcement didnt. Moreover, instead being a solution to cyber threats, law enforcement has become a threat itself. The DNC didnt have the FBI investigate the attacks from Russia likely because they didnt want the FBI reading all their files, finding wrongdoing by the DNC. Its not that they did anything actually wrong, but its more like that famous quote from Richelieu Give me six words written by the most honest of men and Ill find something to hang him by. Give all your internal emails over to the FBI and Im certain theyll find something to hang you by, if they want. Or consider the case of Andrew Auernheimer. He found AT Ts website made public user accounts of the first i. Pad, so he copied some down and posted them to a news site. AT T had denied the problem, so making the problem public was the only way to force them to fix it. Such access to the website was legal, because AT T had made the data public. However, prosecutors disagreed. Usage Statistics for www. gofishing. ru рЕТЙПД УФБФЙУФЙЛЙ бРТЕМШ 2014 уУЩМБАЭБСУС УФТБОЙГБ дБФБ УПЪДБОЙС 01May. In order to protect the powerful, they twisted and perverted the law to put Auernheimer in jail. Its not that law enforcement is bad, its that its not the unalloyed good Rosenstein imagines. When law enforcement becomes the thing Rosenstein describes, it means we live in a police state. Where law enforcement cant go. Rosenstein repeats the frequent claim in the encryption debate Our society has never had a system where evidence of criminal wrongdoing was totally impervious to detection. Of course our society has places impervious to detection, protected by both legal and natural barriers. An example of a legal barrier is how spouses cant be forced to testify against each other. This barrier is impervious. A better example, though, is how so much of government, intelligence, the military, and law enforcement itself is impervious. If prosecutors could gather evidence everywhere, then why isnt Rosenstein prosecuting those guilty of CIA torture Oh, you say, government is a special exception. If that were the case, then why did Rosenstein dedicate a precious third of his speech discussing the rule of law and how it applies to everyone, protecting people from abuse by the government. It obviously doesnt, theres one rule of government and a different rule for the people, and the rule for government means theres lots of places law enforcement cant go to gather evidence. Likewise, the crypto backdoor Rosenstein is demanding for citizens doesnt apply to the President, Congress, the NSA, the Army, or Rosenstein himself. Then there are the natural barriers. The police cant read your mind. They can only get the evidence that is there, like partial fingerprints, which are far less reliable than full fingerprints. They cant go backwards in time. I mention this because encryption is a natural barrier. Its their job to overcome this barrier if they can, to crack crypto and so forth. Its not our job to do it for them. Its like the camera that increasingly comes with TVs for video conferencing, or the microphone on Alexa style devices that are always recording. This suddenly creates evidence that the police want our help in gathering, such as having the camera turned on all the time, recording to disk, in case the police later gets a warrant, to peer backward in time what happened in our living rooms. The nothing is impervious argument applies here as well. And its equally bogus here. By not helping police by not recording our activities, we arent somehow breaking some long standing tradit. And this is the scary part. Its not that we are breaking some ancient tradition that theres no place the police cant go with a warrant. Instead, crypto backdoors breaking the tradition that never before have I been forced to help them eavesdrop on me, even before Im a suspect, even before any crime has been committed. Sure, laws like CALEA force the phone companies to help the police against wrongdoers but here Rosenstein is insisting I help the police against myself. Balance between privacy and public safety. Rosenstein repeats the frequent claim that encryption upsets the balance between privacysafety Warrant proof encryption defeats the constitutional balance by elevating privacy above public safety. This is laughable, because technology has swung the balance alarmingly in favor of law enforcement. Far from Going Dark as his side claims, the problem we are confronted with is Going Light, where the police state monitors our every action. You are surrounded by recording devices. If you walk down the street in town, outdoor surveillance cameras feed police facial recognition systems. If you drive, automated license plate readers can track your route. If you make a phone call or use a credit card, the police get a record of the transaction. If you stay in a hotel, they demand your ID, for law enforcement purposes. And thats their stuff, which is nothing compared to your stuff. You are never far from a recording device you own, such as your mobile phone, TV, AlexaSiriOk. Google device, laptop. Modern cars from the last few years increasingly have always on cell connections and data recorders that record your every action and location. Even if you hike out into the country, when you get back, the FBI can subpoena your GPS device to track down your hidden weapons cache, or grab the photos from your camera. And this is all offline. So much of what we do is now online. Of the photographs you own, fewer than 1 are printed out, the rest are on your computer or backed up to the cloud. Your phone is also a GPS recorder of your exact position all the time, which if the government wins the Carpenter case, they police can grab without a warrant. Tagging all citizens with a recording device of their position is not balance but the premise for a novel more dystopic than 1. If suspected of a crime, which would you rather the police searched Your person, houses, papers, and physical effects Or your mobile phone, computer, email, and onlinecloud accounts The balance of privacy and safety has swung so far in favor of law enforcement that rather than debating whether they should have crypto backdoors, we should be debating how to add more privacy protections. But its not conclusiveRosenstein defends the going light Golden Age of Surveillance by pointing out its not always enough for conviction. Nothing gives a conviction better than a persons own words admitting to the crime that were captured by surveillance.