British Police Demand Access To Encryption Keys 814
flip-flop writes "In the wake of recent terrorist attacks, police here in the UK have asked for sweeping new powers they claim will help them counter the threat. Among these is making it a criminal offense for people to refuse disclosing their encryption keys when the police want to access someone's files." From the article: "The most controversial of the police proposals is the demand to be able to hold without charge a terrorist suspect for three months instead of 14 days. An Acpo spokesman said the complexity and scale of counter-terrorist operations means the 14-day maximum is often insufficient."
Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Interesting)
GoodGuy has a friend who is in some domestic trouble and is hiding some of his assets in off-shore accounts. He keeps his friends account information in an encrypted folder on his computer because his friend doesn't want to lose it and trusts him.
EvilAgentMan thinks GoodGuy is a terrorist planning on taking over the world, due to his recent purchase of a salt water aquarium, baby sharks, laser pointers and duct tape. He charges GoodGuy as being a EvilDoer(TM) and puts him in jail. While looking for evidence, he notices an encrypted folder on GoodGuy's computer. He tells GoodGuy that he must hand over his encryption keys or be charged with the crime of not handing over his encryption keys. He must decide on going to jail for something he is completely innocent of, or releasing potentially incriminating evidence on his friend.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
Are the police really going to believe "I don't have it, they're not my files"?
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:2)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
One of those rights is the right of silence. If when someone's arrested they don't have to answer any of the questions the police ask them
True, but if you're arrested and withhold information which you later rely on in court the fact you withheld that information may be taken into account when deciding if your guilty (or not)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Informative)
a) When you're arrested the Officer will say "it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later come to rely on in court". Note the part in bold - when questioned means when you are in a police interview room being tape recorded, not standing in the street talking to some moron in a blue uniform. Coppers will often hope to bluff you with this.
b) If you request a solicitor the
Re:How else? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unlike you - who manage to spend your tax dollars, not on your lazy sick people - but rather to build fanatic "mujahaddin" fighters, who later turn their bloodthirsty sights on the homes of their CIA paymasters!
Good shot. Americins seem to love Ameria so much, but express only contempt for many Americans themselves - as if there were some magical phantasm of "America" that were comprised of something other than the people dwelling therein.
Re:russian front (Score:4, Interesting)
After which they went chasing the culprits round the world with as much military force as they could.
WWII or war on terror - take your pick. Not to diminish the importance, but in both cases America only got involved because it was directly provoked, not because of some altruistic / noble motive.
Re:russian front (Score:4, Insightful)
Right. I remember when Iraq attacked the U.S. I was scared to death.
Hijackers on 9/11/2001 were mostly from *SAUDI ARABIA*. Bin Ladin attracts newcommers to his cause mainly by expressing a distaste for U.S. presence in *SAUDI ARABIA*.
We invaded Afghanistan, spent 4 or 5 months there, and basically pulled out. Then we, for no justifiable reason, invaded a soverign nation and deposed the elected head of state.
Yes, we were provoked. But, it's time to ask the two critical questions:
1.) Are we attacking the right people?
2.) Why did they attack us in the first place?
Understanding the enemy is the first step to defeating him.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
Then you'll be found to be aiding and abetting.
If you're holding data for someone that you don't know what it is or how to decrypt it, you will be perceived as an accomplice. Or, just summarily assumed to be the original source of the data and just recalcitrant.
Interesting to see would be if you can have your lawyer hold onto these things and have them covered under privelege.
It's scary that in so-called free societies it can become a crime to keep (possibly legal and innocuous) secrets from the government.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Happy to help (Score:4, Funny)
hire is thee key
the pass code is "My hovercraft is full of eels."
RSA key mynipplesexplodewithdelight
here is a little test message;
Ya! Ya! Ya! Ya! Do you waaaaant...do you waaaaaant...to come back to my place, bouncy bouncy? If I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me? I...I am no longer infected.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:4, Interesting)
What if they find a file they can't associate with an application, assume that it's encrypted, and insist that you give them the encryption keys for a file that's actually a corrupted Word document? Crypto documents are designed so that they're not supposed to look like crypto documents.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
You're screwed.
Remember, you're guilty until proven innocent. If you have data files on your computer that look suspicious or the cops can't read, then you must be trying to hide something. Therefore, you're guilty of something.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Interesting)
TrueCrypt [truecrypt.org] can do this to provide "plausible deniability". The second container does not appear in the filesystem of the first container. That's why you have to be careful to not modify the outer container once the inner container is created. Since the free space of any container will be filled with random data, an additional container inside the free space will be undistinguishable from random noise. Read the manual [truecrypt.org] for more info.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
If you really want to hide something under the new rules, encrypt it and store it on a network of zombie computers, or a p2p network. That will cause real problems for others, but you'll never have possession to be charged with not providing the keys.
Or, just compromise your enemy's computer and store some encrypted files there and then turn them in as a concerned citizen. Even if they manage to get aquitted, the implied guilt during the process will destroy their lives. It's sort of scary if they're gonna assume you are the one who did the encryption simply because you possess the file.
Guantanamo Bay? (Score:3, Insightful)
umm, Guantanamo Bay? [amnesty.org]
Re:Guantanamo Bay? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Guantanamo Bay? (Score:5, Funny)
There is at least one additional rule that goes along with innocent until proven guilty. It's guilty until proven American.
Re:Guantanamo Bay? (Score:4, Insightful)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed....
Either you have to charge them or you have to let them go. This crap isn't even legal under the geneva convention, not that this administration seems to give a damn.
Re:Guantanamo Bay? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah... You know they still haven't found that Holloway girl in Aruba either - and I assure you, that country's a LOT smaller.
Let's cut to the chase - Bin Laden is being assisted by people - a LOT of people. A guy can hide for a lifetime with that kind of help.
Re:Guantanamo Bay? (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's cut to the chase - Bin Laden is being assisted by people - a LOT of people. A guy can hide for a lifetime with that kind of help.
Agreed. This is one of the *only* points I'll let Bush slide on. Everyone is repeating the soundbite about outsourcing the hunt for Bin Laden to Pakistan, but no one is actually trying to take the time to understand the political climate in Pakistan. The government is not a long-lived, well established affair, and power in Pakistan is very decentralized. There are a n
Isn't a subpoena good enough? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
Because there's no friend like a friend who talks you into criminal complicity, I always say. I mean, what are friends for, if not to help you launder money or hide assets? And what ever happened to the bad guys just writing down the key, laminating, and burying it in a coffee can three paces south of the big oak tree on old man Smith's back forty? You know, where you used to go and smoke pot and dream of the days when you'd have enough ill-gotten assets to have to hide them from the court? Ah, those were the days.
Incidentally, what would you have the cops do while they're sitting there looking at the hard drive from a guy they just arrested, who yesterday was having some trouble blowing himself up? Ask him ever so nicely? OK, so he was willing to die in order to kill you and your kids, so he's probably not going to be big on cooperating, but the owner of the cyber cafe where he often runs chats with his equally inept fellow bombers - is it worth being able to crack his encrypted leavings so that maybe we can stop his buddies from smearing more innocent people all over the inside of a tunnel? You are aware that actual people are actually spending their days actually thinking up and acting on ways to kill people that run yogurt stores, work at rehab clinics, build web servers, teach grade school, and have families that depend on them... right? This isn't a game, it's actually happening. And as the prime minister of Autstralia put it so eloquently yesterday, we're using 19th century approaches to dealing with bad guys happy to use 21st century technologies (um, even as these twits condemn modernity - always a telling little bit of confusion on their part).
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Funny)
"The U.S. government" is less typing.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Attached to this email is a file containing the details and photographs of the series of crimes that we are in the process of committing. Be careful, it has personal idenfiying information, documents, and photos that could send us both to jail for a long time! You've got the encryption key already, so you should be able to access it. Also, attached is an unencrypted photo of the most recent crime (all personal identifying information is cropped off, as you'll notice - that's all in the e
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually he would be guilty of not releasing the encryption key and that's what he would go to jail for. Not the aquarium, baby sharks, laser pointers, and duct tape. So he's not completely innocent.
GoodGuy has probably already broken the law anyway (to some degree) by helping his friend hide the information. It's just he wasn't caught yet.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
So let's compare. UK wants 90 days. US wants Guantanamo, military tribunals, zero access to lawyers for suspects, indeterminate holding periods without convictions of crimes...
UK wants encryption keys. US makes it illegal to break any encryption, unless it's the government, wh
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a lot of people who're more comfortable with the monster we know. Hell, look at US foreign policy.
Islamic extremists are hardly the only people killing anyone in Iraq. Iraq was *not* a misogynist medieval theocracy under Saddam! Get your blind prejudice out of your ass and actually take a look around!
The US are not the good guys here. There aren't any good guys here. Especially when ignorant fucks like you spread this same diseased prejudice about the state of Iraq before the war, and especially before the sanctions. I half expect to start hearing people talking about the White Mans Burden. Current US policy is to play legal games so that we can torture and hold people in ways that should be illegal, but duck out through loopholes (gitmo, civilian (read: mercenary) "interrogation specialists", shipping suspects to Syria).
History will show whether or not the Iraqi invasion was better or worse for the country as a whole. I'm not prepared to make that judgement, and I'd pity our president for having made it if I thought the import of it actually touched him. The average Iraqi is substantially worse off today than he was before the invasion. Some (Kurds, most obviously) are much better off. Some are worse off but believe it's for the better and move on. A great many are just pissed off.
Are you seriously going to tell people that the US is better because we don't kill and torture as many people? Thats our big claim to fame as the moral guiding light who will bring true democracy to Iraq?
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
If America cared so much about Hussein killing Iraqis, then why did they give him weapons to do it with? The United States never, ever, cared about the livelyhood of Iraqis. That's why they supported Saddam until he got uppity, and then (with the help of the UN) imposed sanctions that strangled the nation.
Don't give me a song and dance about how you helped free the Iraqi people by deposing Hussein. You helped subjugate them in the first place by propping him up.
Why were you propping him up? Because just a little while back, the other murdering dictator you propped up in Iran got overthrown.
Who else were you funding around that time? Oh, right.. your good friend Osama Bin Laden the freedom fighter.
Your country has its dirty, grubby little fingers all over the mess in the middle east. Why is that? Because the middle east has the substance that you need like a crackhead needs crack. You'll do anything to get it. You'll support dictators, you'll support terrorists, and you'll be friends with the country that the terrorists who attacked you came from.
And now I'm sure you'll be prepared with justifications for why it was OK for the US to support Saddam, and why it was OK for the US to support Osama - but then, people who do horrible things always have justifications for the things they do. Osama has a justification for flying planes into buildings full of civilans, and you have yours for supporting mass murderers.
But aside from tube junkies in America, few people in the rest of the world buy your story. You had an opportunity to show you had changed. You had an opportunity to gain the support of the world after 9/11. You blew it.
Have fun fighting your old friends.
-Laxitive
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
What do you want me to acknowledge? That other western c
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's see, the US has freed the Iraqis from Saddam and delivered them into the hands of terrorists. Here's the difference between Saddam and the terrorists: Saddam had something to lose, and thus he was inherently easier to control than the terrorists, who have nothing to lose.
Now, instead of one madman controlling Iraq - one that could be placated wit
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Interesting)
Because the corrupt, autocratic regimes were friendly to the US, of course. Saudi Arabia still prices oil on the US Dollar - they're still being good little children.
By your tone, I can only assume that you come from a country
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
Your analogy fails. Here's a better one:
The Americans fed and clothed a murderer so that he could help them kill somebody they didn't like.
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not a leftist. I just think you're stupid.
Turn on the TV...look at the situation they were in. The only ones prosperous were the ones in power. That $$ (even the oil for food $$) went straight to Hussein and was not spent on food or upkeep of utilities. And don't do like the rest of the left and leave out all of the facts except the ones that support your case. He ATTACKED A NEIGHBORING COUNTRY. He left the oilfields burning when he realized h
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
Check out Al Jazeera, if you can find it. Then you might see a sampling of what's really going on over there: shot after shot of dead civilians, including many kids. Many more shots of civilians, barely alive, lying in squalid hospital beds, the remains of their arms and legs wrapped in bandages after being blown off by bombs. Innocent civilians being harassed and humiliated at roadblocks, or worse if they panic and fail to comply with a shouted command they can't understand because it's in English.
You'll see footage of heavily armed US troops kicking in doors of houses, pointing their weapons at civilians, shouting (again in English!) at women and childen cowering in the corners and crying. You'll see picture after picture of abuse of prisoners in US prison camps and hear about people, most of them completely innocent even by admission of the US commanders, who disappear into them for years without charges, without lawyers and without any chance to defend themselves.
Every other day there seems to be yet another suicide bombing in Iraq that kills as many people as the one in London two weeks ago. That attack is still getting saturation coverage on the US networks, but the bombings in Iraq rate, at most, a brief mention each.
Arab culture is quite different from ours, and we can't assume they share our more abstract values like our Bill of Rights (that is, if we actually practiced them ourselves). But they belong to the very same species as we, so it does seem somewhat reasonable to believe that they, no more than we, like being killed or maimed or abused or imprisoned, or having that happen to our friends and families.
Still can't figure out why they hate us? Or are you going to tell me that all that footage is faked somehow?
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Insightful)
While the wisdom of the US invasion of Iraq can certainly be debated, as can the actual position of ave
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:3, Interesting)
Is this Kuroshin? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do they hate us? Well shit - it's not just the US/UK they hate after all! Let's compile a list shall we?
- The Russians (because of Afghanistan and Chechnya)
- The east Indians (because of Kashmir)
- The Isrealis (because of the Palistinians)
- Anyone else who dares to defy 'Allah's Will' - whatever the Imam says it is this week.
The radicalized 'religion of peace' is destoying much progress made in the Arab world. Whole governmen
Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (Score:5, Insightful)
It's kind of amusing that we defended Brittain against the fascists sixty years ago and now we're encouraging them to adopt our fascism.
The US entered the second world war in the December of 1941, a full year and a half after the Battle of Britain in summer 1940. Hitler abandoned Operation Sealion, the invasion of Britain, when the RAF defeated the Luftwaffe for control of Britains skies during that long summer.
As the other poster says, you didnt defend us, you fought with us.
Encryption key (Score:5, Funny)
01100110 01110101 01100011 01101011 00100000 01101111 01100110 01100110
Re:Encryption key (Score:2)
Re:Encryption key (Score:4, Funny)
Two.
Three.
Four.
Five.
Re:Encryption key (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Encryption key (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the exact same combination as my luggage!
Simple Solution (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Those innocent till proven guilty
OR
Those craving for a UK Patriot act
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Or better (Score:3, Insightful)
The same thought occured to me.
Indeed, if I lived there I would consider preparing several such files and stating publically and in advance that that's exactly what I was doing. They're not encrypted, so it is impossible to provide the key. Assuming it's impossible to distinguish between an encrypted f
Encryption Keys? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Encryption Keys? (Score:5, Interesting)
And if you do not have the key? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And if you do not have the key? (Score:3, Insightful)
So "I forgot" is a crime, right? (Score:2)
This sounds so awful and stupid I don't want to even think about it.
Re:So "I forgot" is a crime, right? (Score:3, Funny)
Already an offense? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Already an offense? (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, that was my immediate thought also. The RIP act [homeoffice.gov.uk] was actually past in 2000.
One interesting point I remember from it was that if you were no longer in possession of the key then you had to prove you didn't have it. In other words proving a negative! Besides, I'm sure any criminal wouldn't disclose the keys and take a shorter prison sentence if what they were encrypting was more damaging.
I'd advise anybody working in the computing profession, in the U.K., to be aware of this law and others.
Sunset: May 26, 2005 (Score:4, Informative)
Where are civil liberties truly valued? (Score:5, Insightful)
~Security - ~Liberty (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't have liberty without security, so what's the point of talking about preserving all your civil liberties when you're not free anyway? In reality compromises must be made to maximise freedom.
Re:~Security - ~Liberty (Score:3)
Inmates in prison are very secure.. are they free? What you propose will make us all inmates in our very own police state.
Is it better to live a life of safety, watched by a suspicious government every second of your life? Not allowed to do anyt
The obvious solution (Score:2, Funny)
Employers are competing for Ashcroft? (Score:3, Funny)
demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not familiar with British law, but I do know American law is based on the same doctorines as the British(from a historical perspective at least).
In the U.S. the court can order you to provide encryption keys and if you do not you will be held in contempt of the court [wikipedia.org]. This usually means the judge puts you in jail until you decide to provide the keys. To me(IANAL) it seems like the above just formalises the practice. Via the wikipedia reference it appears as though the U.S. did this in 1981.
Being held in contempt of the court is a very normal tool for judges to use with uncooperative court subjects, cryptographic keys aren't special or different.
Re:demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (Score:3, Informative)
DeCSS (Score:5, Funny)
Re:DeCSS (Score:4, Funny)
Out source! (Score:2)
Why not just stick them on a plane heading to the US where they can call them an "enemy combatant" and hold them until the end of time.
PATRIOT Act... (Score:2)
Won't be long now (Score:5, Funny)
The Right to Prevent Self-Incrimination (Score:5, Interesting)
In England and Wales, "a defendant cannot be convicted solely due to their silence [wikipedia.org]" yet this is saying precisely the opposite.
Self incrimination? (Score:2)
I would think disclosing the key to your encrypted data would qualify.
People let it happen (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not happy that New Yorkers are willing to subject themselves to 'random' searches. I'm pretty sure the London terrorist attacks will be the catylst for widespread CCTV in the U.S.
It's already an offense (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see what that problem is, as long as due process is respected. Murder suspects can't turn away search warrants of their property, and if the proper warrants are filled out electronic files should be treated as physical property.
Secret warrants or police officers "going fishing" is another story.
Well Chomsky is in order here... (Score:4, Insightful)
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be British and very very very very very afraid:
Noam Chomsky [zmag.org]
The western world is in its worst decadence since the Medieval times...
Re:Well Chomsky is in order here... (Score:5, Insightful)
That would rather be:
USA government = bad
and it is not a matter of belief but of fact. He doesn't tell nice feel-good patriotic stories of heroes and scoundrels but presents steel arguments and ice cold facts to make his case.
Do you have any objection to the facts? Can you point to an inaccuracy? Most likely not. Now if his views do not settle right with your feel-good ideas that is a problem you have to deal with...
Rights of the accused (Score:5, Insightful)
Incrimination for fun and profit... (Score:5, Funny)
For bonus points, see if you can get the file onto the hard drive of some politician you hate.
Dual Encryption Now Needed (Score:5, Interesting)
Naturally the algorithms would require that it would be undetectable that this is what you have done.
Some alarm systems have something similar. When you open the business you use the real code. When the robber forces you to open up at gunpoint you use the fake code. The alarm does turn off as expected but it also calls the police with an "under duress" alarm.
what we need is a multi-key system (Score:4, Insightful)
Then, if somebody demands/coerces the key from you, you can simply provide one of the alternate keys, which decrypts the cipertext to reveal an innocuous message.
Obviously the system would have to be designed such that it would be impossible to detect how many messages are simultaneously encoded, and no way to determine any one key using knowledge of any of the other keys. But it might be mathematically possible.
Has any work been done on this?
fortunetly (Score:3, Interesting)
but seriously, my hobbies include random number generation, data compression, and encryption, as well as large number series (Pi, fibonucci, etc.); I have many very large files of apperently random data. But I also have sensitive data belonging to other people; I've worked for various laywers, a government agency, and a couple small businesses as a basic security advisor (among other jobs) not all the data I have is my own, and I don't know what all of it is (for the lawyers, my home is their off-site backup location, and I have copies of client paperwork that would send them to jail for a few hundred years, if it were all added up, but that is under attourny/client privelidge)
I guess I'm in a similar situation with ISP's; there should be a burden of proof that the key exists in the defendants possession in the first place.
Some of my hobby research includes 2/3rd's keys:
say the real key is '10100101'
generate a random number '00110111'
xor them '10010010'
then break it up into 3 sections
AB
BC
CA
A and B each have half the real key, so they can get in.
A and C have the first half, and can rebuild the second
B and C have the second half, and can rebuild the first
the problem is that A and B each have half the real key, square-rooting the brute force time.
I've been thinking about generating multiple sets of random numbers, and the result of xor'ing the key by each of them...
key: 01011010
rd1: 10100101
rd2: 00011100
rd3: 10110010
xr1: 11111111 (hmm, tried to be random, got the exact inverse...)
xr2: 01000110
xr3: 11101000
noone gets the root key, and they rotate which random/xor number they get, A gets rd1 and xr2, B gets rd2 and xr3, and C gets rd3 and xr1.
so A and B can get the key by rebuilding xr2 and rd2, B and C can get the key by rebuilding xr3 and rd3, and C and A can get the key by rebuilding xr1 and rd1.
if any one user is captured or turns traitor, their key alone will be of no help to cracking the master key; while the other two remaining users may be able to get together and re-key the data to a newly selected third user, effectivly excluding the old, captured key.
I support this! (Score:3, Funny)
Britons United against Greator Govermental Executive Reform Ostensibly From Fear
B.U.G.G.E.R.O.F.F. stands with the government! We cannot allow the morons from The Society Of dissenting Organisms For Freedom to undermine the war on terra! Please write your representative and tell him your views. S.O.D.O.F.F is an extremely dangerous organization which threatens our Purity of essence. Being an american I can only lend moral support. On that note I wish to let all Britons know that the American Society for a Secure Homeland Over Liberty and Equality is here to help!
Together A.S.S.H.O.L.E. and B.U.G.G.E.R.O.F.F are a perfect match.
Re:I support this! (Score:3, Funny)
Telecommunications Information Technology Services and Administrative Support Systems
Unfortunately we lost our support from above. Morale drooped and our Adminstrative Support Systems group was left out in the cold.
coming to take you away (Score:4, Insightful)
and I said nothing because I wasn't catholic
Then they came for the witches,
and I said nothing because I'm not a witch
Next they came for the jews,
and I said nothing because I'm not jewish
Now they've come for me,
and there is no one left to say anything for me.
I'd love to give you my decryption key (Score:3, Funny)
Why are you hooking up that generator to two wires that go nowhere?
Oh
Re:This is a major point (Score:5, Interesting)
They want encryption keys, but I dare say that not ONE of the investigators (or government officials) can point to a single connection between the recent stuff in London and encrypted information. They keep demanding solutions to problems that don't exist - that's why this stuff keeps happening. If they'd try to solve the problems that DO exist, they might get somehwere- WITHOUT becoming a police state.
LOL! That's cute (Score:5, Interesting)
A police state is not a consequence of misguided attempts at preventing terrorism, but is instead an end being achieved under the cover of fighting terrorism.
Remember, Terrorism is an end to a means for the terrorists, and the governments "fighting" it.
Think the war in Iraq was about Sept 11 or WMD? Think again. It was because defense contractors have well placed connections. For corporations, your life is only worth what they can get out of it. If they can sell military ordinance by getting your children killed in Iraq, so be it. Their gods are money and power, not the ones your Priest, Rabbi, Cleric, Circle Leader or anything else are telling you about. If you think I'm being paranoid, just look up corporate environmental management. Hell, just look up what Coca-Cola is doing in India.
Human life is just another natural resource for corporations. Nothing more.
Re:LOL! That's cute (Score:3, Interesting)
I used to have a boss that would refer to you as a resource to your face instead of hinting you might have a name or be a human being. Labor is just like raw materials and capital, stuff you feed in to corporation machinery to produce profit.
Needless to say the powers that be like both their labor and raw materials to be as cheap as possible, hence globalization of the work force so you have the opportunity to comp
Re:pfft (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally, if you don't trust any methods above you allways have one time pad that is provably 100% secure. Drawback is that keylength equals to message lenght and key can't be reused.
Re:pfft (Score:5, Insightful)
And how exactly would you know this?
From the PGP FAQ:
Sure it is unlikely, but unless you have some way of proving what you say, it would be unwise to believe that no one can / will in the near future be able to crack or intercept your encrypted messages.Re:pfft (Score:3, Interesting)
If the NSA were able to crack RSA or any of the other well known cryptographic algorithms, you would probably never hear about it from them.
In the case of RSA and other major algorithms, I'm not so sure this is true. The NSA is tasked with assuring national security, and that involves a lot more than just codebreaking and signals intelligence. In particular, it also involves a lot of thinking about the capabilities of others and what those capabilities might mean fo the US government and US industry -
Re:Safe or private? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Safe or private? (Score:3, Insightful)
The goal isn't to end terrorism, but to convert the democracies into police states.
Re:Decrypt this! (Score:3, Funny)
TubGrrl is the shizzz?
Re:Is it possible to build in a decoy? (Score:3, Informative)
You're asking about 'rubber hose encryption.' Google for it.