New EU security strategy: Sod cyber terrorism, BAN ENCRYPTION “It is unacceptable that a Kalashnikov can be bought easily on the internet,”* thundered European Commission number two Frans Timmermans yesterday, as he presented the Commission’s plans to combat terrorism. So what’s he going to do about it? That’s right, hold a consultation. The much-trumpeted new EU Security Strategy is …
Politicians <> "democratic representatives" for some values of "politican" and yes that's including some of our elected MPs in that category.
I don't recall any of us voting to invade Iraq based on a bag of lies - but our politicians did it anyway. That was in spite of several huge anti-war marches.
Erm.. EU Commissioners are appointed, not elected.
It wasn't EU commissioners who started an illegal war, had no plans for dealing with the aftermath and generally just laid fertile grounds for al Quaeda, ISIS and their ilk to flourish. You'll probably need to look a little closer to home for that.
The strategy reminds of of when I lived in Stockholm many years ago. In order to combat alcoholism the price of alcohol was very high. To buy it for home consumption you had to queue at the small number of State alcohol stores who sold a very limited range. To make a beef stew all we could get was an Algerian red wine.
The result was that moderate drinkers almost stopped drinking. However - the queues outside our local store were usually full of obvious alcoholics.
That a Kalashnikov can make it past customs, border controls and law enforcement to be available to be sold online...
Until we have the technology to transmit matter digitally you cant smuggle guns via broadband in a tar file over Tor using a torrent tracker.
T'internet is ne'er the problem with this type of thing.
Immigration is next. They're sneaking in through our fat pipes!
How about not creating conflict zones which haemorrage weapons around our borders for starters?
That is much simpler, and generally more effective.
If we did not openly and actively sponsor fanatics waging civil wars on the Russian periphery and in the Middle East for the last 20 years the AK47s (actually, most of them are AK72 nowdays) would not have been there to be sold in the first place.
If we did not openly and actively sponsor fanatics waging civil wars on the Russian periphery and in the Middle East for the last 20 years the AK47s (actually, most of them are AK72 nowdays) would not have been there to be sold in the first place.
.. and nobody would have made a bean off arms deals.
Wars are simply there to convert tax money into private income without too many questions asked - profit is the cause of war. The rest is IMHO just camouflage and fluff to hide the bigger picture.
Errr I don't think so. It may be an effective threat - its also an effective way to get yourself MDK'd by SO19 quicker than you can say "Brazilian plumber".
I doubt there are many scenarios where the rewards matches the risk. In fact anyone who produces one in public be it in a criminal manner or in jest deserves all they get, at the very least it would clean up the gene pool.
Having said all that I suspect the UK is one of the few countries where you could wander stupidly around waving an AK, and still have a reasonable probability of surviving the experience.
"Deactivation" of a "Fully Automatic" weapon here in the States "usually" means that someone took a cutting torch and burned through the reciever of the gun, rendering it useless.
Many times they cut right through them leaving two pieces.
I think you could tell it was deactivated.
Id be more concerned about an "Airsoft" replica of an AK type gun. They look exactly like the gun except they don't shoot bullets, just plastic BB's.They are everywhere here.
If you pointed that at a cop, he/she would likely consider you armed with a real weapon.
Interesting argument. I had an armed robbery at my workplace involving a sawn off double barrel shotgun. After the event, one of the other staff scoffed that it had been a replica.
When you're unarmed and looking down the barrel of a gun held by a shouting lunatic, there is absolutely no way thoughts about whether the gun is real will enter your head.
Id be more concerned about an "Airsoft" replica of an AK type gun. They look exactly like the gun except they don't shoot bullets, just plastic BB's.They are everywhere here.
If you pointed that at a cop, he/she would likely consider you armed with a real weapon.
Given events over there, that appears to be slowly solved by Darwin..
Personally, I completely fail to see how the quoted line relates to the crazy and unambiguous statements recently made by US politicos about cryptography.
Not that the conclusion is necessarily wrong, but I'd like to see more conclusive evidence.
Of course. Because when a terrorist wants to send secret messages he goes down to PC World and buys a yard of encryption.
Anyone who develops in Java will be familiar with the idiotic scenario where you can only download so-called Strong Cryptography libraries if you promise not to pass them on to the bad guys.
Those who govern are hopelessly behind the technological power curve. The global cybersphere is not something that can be effectively controlled at a national level. Lessons learned in regulating the flow of goods and people simply do not apply.
It is true that IT is also woefully behind the same power curve when it comes to being able to provide effective cybersecurity. But other than to create a regulatory climate that facilitates and encourages the development and deployment of robust cybersecurity technology there is nothing those who govern can do that is not likely to prove counterproductive--if not outright hostile to the interests of the people. Restricting effective use of digital encryption technology in the interest of preserving the government's ability to hoover on the cheap is a prime example
@Hargrove: "Those who govern are hopelessly behind the technological power curve. ".
Hit the nail on the head, only the point is more basic.
Those in power are not qualified to do anything OTHER than seek power. That's why there are so many MP's that did "non-jobs" to get there.
Politics - the pursuit of power without merit.
P.
"In short, the Commission’s solution to serious organised crime, terrorism and cyber-crime is to stop IT firms offering encryption."
Does that mean I have to retract that paper I just sent to 'Electronics Letters' describing a new cryptographic algorithm I seem to have invented? I was quite pleased with it (although partly expect to be told someone else invented it a few undred years ago, despite not finding it on the web or in the crypto books in Blackwells,).
<Actually true, I have just sent a paper to El Reg's rival describing a new crypto algorithm .. I'll come quietly, officer.>
@Arthur the cat
"If you're a professional cryptographer, I'll look forward to reading it. If not, please, don't do that. Just read
https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/1998/1015.html#cipherdesign
"
Don't worry, Electronics Letters is a refereed journal, it won't make it into print unless it both works and the referee(s) also can't find it anywhere.
Perhaps the assembled politicians would like to indicate how low-tech bad-guys are to be kept out of legitimate business communications. As it is at the moment 'dodgy Ken' with his Android can't get onto my Internet Banking by downloading an App, but without any encryption?
Why is this obvious to anyone AND obviously being ignored by the EU?
> the concerns of law enforcement authorities on new encryption technologies
Encryption is just one form of obfuscation. Another is substituting one word or phrase for what you really mean: like saying "the product" instead of a crate-full of weapons, or "collateral damage" instead of dead civilians.
However, it goes further. We are all aware that in broadband sales the phrase "up to" means less than, "unlimited" means we know you're stupid enough to believe that and saying something "may" happen means it's a dead cert. - unless that would be a good thing™. So would banning encryption also outlaw weasel words used in advertising, or require politicians to tell the truth or for government communiques to contain facts?
If only the European Commissioner would stop speaking in code.
"deploying the best tools to counter terrorist propaganda on the internet and in social media,”
So - we're going to shut down Faux News et al, and ban them and theirs from ever using a computer?
Perhaps ban politicians from appearing in/on media, or posting anything on social media?
Maybe, just maybe, we'll find a way to gag all of the folks out there without a whit of logic, common sense, or rational thought in a permanent manner?
I shudder to think of just what might be oozing through the brain that concocted that statement.
"deploying the best tools to counter terrorist propaganda on the internet and in social media,”
So - we're going to shut down Faux News et al, and ban them and theirs from ever using a computer?
It's that it violates the basic principle of self-determination, otherwise I'd have no objections against shutting down Twitter and Facebook :).
So - we're going to shut down Faux News et al, and ban them and theirs from ever using a computer?
What? You mean there is actually somebody at that fine propagandist establishment who actually knows how to use a computer (for other than downloading pr0n)?
Will wonders never cease?
...that strong encryption software is out there in the wild and has been for the last couple of decades? Yes, you can ban in in commercial products & put everyone's banking transactions at risk. No, you can't ban criminal organisations from rolling their own applications using technology that's already available to them.
Criminal organisations are criminal because they're already doing illegal things. They're not going to stop doing illegal things because you make encryption illegal.
You know, I have never understood why the very common, knee-jerk response to someone abusing something that is legal in a criminal manner is to recommend making the thing that is legal illegal. IE: a 50cm length of steel pipe is legal to have, beating someone with it is not; so we should ban 50cm lengths of steel pipe.
I'm guessing that the politicos have never heard either of the phrases "In for a penny, in for a pound" or "As well to be hung for a man as a sheep". A crim willing to break one law will be, more than likely, willing to break two.
1) Shit happens with $stuff to $someone
2) SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE
3) A proposal to ban $stuff emerges from a politician like a particularly nasty stomach content emerges from an elephant. This is generally called "$someone's law"
4) THIS IS SOMETHING
5) Neurotics ("BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT IS LIKE THE PARENT THAT I NEVER HAD") and people who demand that everything look like my little ponyland hail the courageous idea
6) IMPLEMENTED!
It is rumoured that one could go to certain drinking dens and perhaps meet some of our "friends" from ex. Yugoslavia that the EU+NATO made all of themselves ... all analogue business; no internet required.
The people who provides these "services", they tend to be conservative and traditional people - who value not being in jail and they appreciate that their business is much safer when the plod spends all of their time sniffing everybody's pr0n and cat-movies.
It's laughable to hear the armchair experts pontificate about public safety, the Net and terrorism. Most haven't got a clue and couldn't buy one with all the money Bill Gates has stolen. Unfortunately we live in a new sad world where terrorism and digital crimes are an everyday occurrence and this is just the tip of the public security iceberg. The bad guys are so far ahead of authorities in using technology that it's almost futile.
Do these moron government officials not understand that they already have the ability to read any communication on the planet? Look at the chaos around you, morons, what good is all your surveillance?
ISIS openly recruits and communicates over TWITTER - last I checked it was fairly easy to eavesdrop on a Twitter conversation, you don't even need the NSA for that.
Why does it feel like we're in a car that has gone over the cliff, and the driver turns and looks at us with a crazed smile and says Don't worry, we'll be fine, I'll just hit the accelerator.
Shutting down Wikipedia and FaceBook would work better.
No source for explosive recipes.. no medium to share them amongst your mates.
Hey, let's just get rid of the whole Internet Thang and return to the days when...
Oooh. That would be a bad idea. We could not spend all of our time tracking you so we can spaff adverts and take part in the global multi-billion industry that doubles the cost of products in order to put half in our pockets.
Please... Won't someone think of the advertisers?
'Adjusting for 347.1a12:24. Location 58:32:12:7: Analysing'
"What's the conclusion Bob?"
"Apparently they thought some cult was going to kill them off."
"And?"
"Just a Moment."
data received.
Set-Cookie: ACOOKIE=C8ctADE3ODYyMGQ5LTM3NDMtNGIzZC1iMWMyLTIyMTVlOTc0MDY4NAAAAAABAAAAGV8AAK44LFWuOCxVAQAAAIsnAACuOCxVrjgsVQAAAAA-;
'Do you want to buy some socks?'
"Any vestigial signs of Meat Bob?"
"Just the usual leftovers left over when the advertisers consume all revenue from the producers prior to going IPO and then go tit's up because they have no producers with money left to sell to."
"Mark it toxic and leave Orbit."
'Do you want to buy some socks?'
!!!Warning. Quarantine Failure!!!
!!!Warning. System Infected!!!
!!!Sorry Bob!!!
!!!Galactic Decontamination in 5:....
"It's full of Socks.!1?!"
'Hi Bob, C8ctADE3ODYyMGQ5LTM3NDMtNGIzZC1iMWMyLTIyMTVlOTc0MDY4NAAAAAABAAAAGV8AAK44LFWuOCxVAQAAAIsnAACuOCxVrjgsVQAAAAA-;'
'Do you want to buy some socks?'
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
