ENISA / Europol almost argue against crypto backdoors While the FBI, in the person of James Comey, continues its campaign to persuade the tech sector that mathematics isn't that big a thing and therefore backdoors are feasible, The European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA) and Europol have tip-toed around the issue, issuing a joint statement that both …
I'm curious, NSA spied on Europe, its leaders, its politicians, civil servants, judges, journalists etc. what was Europol's position on this crime? Approval? Acquiescence? Ambivalence? Have they even investigated it, or simply decided such crimes are too big to investigate?
Are we saying that FBI can demand access to Europe's communications, even if it clashes with the EU right to privacy. A backdoor doesn't respect jurisdictional limits. Alice talks to Bob and the only jurisdiction there is Alice's and Bob's *NOT* Charlie, even if Charlie happens to have the backdoor key and really wants to listen in.
Perhaps you're fine with US law applying to Europe, so what if the backdoor is being used by Russia or China or Israel or Syria even?
And then there's the key escrow thing, all those LinkedIn passwords in escrow, how safe were they? It was a single point of failure, and it failed. Why do you need to reach around Alice and Bobs legal rights anyway?
You're assuming the intelligence service in your country never spies on other countries.
The NSA is just the tip of the iceberg. Nearly every country has an intelligence service, and they all spy on other countries; even allies. If Europol went after the NSA, they'd have to go after everyone.. including themselves.
A backdoor may not respect jurisdictional limits (WTF this means), but it can be subject to many different types of jurisdictions.
Before you freak out about installed back doors, learn something about how encryption works. There is ways to make an installed back door very secure. A lot more secure than say... the method most people use to login, with their weak and often overused password.
What you should be concerned about are the mountain of vulnerabilities available as an attack vector, which is what criminals (who are the real threat here) will use. I don't hear you griping about this.
Criminals aren't the real threat. That's what insurance is for.
Governments are the real threat. Their war on dissidents is only just the beginning. First they go after unpopular groups. You might think that's fine, but when they're through, they'll be going after you.
I, for one, intend to remain a dissident. A free dissident, thanks.
If a British citizen with an iPhone purchased in France and roaming in Germany iMessages a Chinese citizen roaming in Sweden using an iPhone purchased in Denmark, which government's keys need to be inserted in the iMessage communications by an American company (Apple) legally based in Luxembourg using servers hosted in Eire?
Richard Dawkins has been succeeded in the Oxford chair for the Public Understanding of Science by the mathematician Marcus du Sautoy. Clearly there should be an associated chair to promote Politician's Understanding of Science.
On the other hand, maybe applications for grants to study, say, unbreakable backdoors in public encryption would be more successful. Time to sharpen those quill pens, methinks.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
