Australia To Compel Technology Firms To Provide Access To Encrypted Missives (reuters.com) 230
Australia on Friday proposed new laws to compel companies such as U.S. social media giant Facebook and device manufacturer Apple to provide security agencies access to encrypted messages. From a report: The measures will be the first in an expected wave of global legislation as pressure mounts on technology companies to provide such access after several terror suspects used encrypted applications ahead of attacks. Australia, a staunch U.S. ally, is on heightened alert for attacks by home-grown radicals since 2014 and authorities have said they have thwarted several plots, although Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said law enforcement needed more help. "We need to ensure the internet is not used as a dark place for bad people to hide their criminal activities from the law," Turnbull told reporters in Sydney. "The reality is, however, that these encrypted messaging applications and voice applications are being used obviously by all of us, but they're also being used by people who seek to do us harm."
Not going to happen (Score:2)
Ever!
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Funny)
Will happen, eventually. But it will not solve the underlying problem of encryption technology being widely available. That stable door has been open for so long that the horse has bolted, galloped, cantered and eventually settled down to raise a family somewhere in Wyoming.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's also silly to think they won't just use an encrypted messaging program outside of Australian jurisdiction.
Re:Here's a thought.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Quit letting people from terrorist prone countries or parts of the world into YOUR country...where they refuse to assimilate and become pots of festering terrorist ideology waiting to unleash itself into the host country.
Someone should have told the Aboriginals & Native Americans that a long time ago
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Here's a thought.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Quit letting people from terrorist prone countries or parts of the world into YOUR country...where they refuse to assimilate and become pots of festering terrorist ideology waiting to unleash itself into the host country.
Someone should have told the Aboriginals & Native Americans that a long time ago
It wasn't until I read this that it occurred to me that handing out smallpox infected blankets was an act of terrorism.
Re: (Score:3)
It wasn't an act of terrorism, but it may have been an attempt at genocide with bioweapons...but it's not clear whether it was an intentional use of bioweaponry or not.
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't an act of terrorism, but it may have been an attempt at genocide with bioweapons...
I'm not sure I see the distinction. If I mail you an envelope full of anthrax, that's terror, right? But if my ultimate goal is to kill everyone "like you", it's now an attempt at genocide but not terror? Why are terrorism and genocide attempts mutually exclusive?
Re: (Score:2)
The definition of terrorism Google gives me is, "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." This definition doesn't preclude genocide. Even your M-W definition doesn't make coercion a necessary component.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Here's a thought.... (Score:5, Informative)
It wasn't until I read this that it occurred to me that handing out smallpox infected blankets was an act of terrorism.
It wasn't an act of terrorism, but it may have been an attempt at genocide with bioweapons...but it's not clear whether it was an intentional use of bioweaponry or not.
It was neither an act of terrorism nor an attempted genocide because it didn't happen [umich.edu]. The entire story is a fraud, perpetrated by a former "ethnic studies" professor named Ward Churchill.
The High Plains Smallpox Epidemic of 1837 was caused by personal contact with infected passengers from the riverboat St. Peter's, owned by a fur trading company. The epidemic on the High Plains centered around Fort Clark which, despite the name, was not a military installation. It was a privately owned fur trading post. The boss of Fort Clark was Francis Chardon, a fur trader. His personal diary survived to this day, one of numerous eyewitness accounts preserved from the time.
Not only were infected blankets not distributed, but correspondence from Joshua Pilcher, the Indian Bureau's sub-agent to the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Ponca at Fort Kiowa, just south of Fort Clark, to Mr. Chardon describes one particular problem interfering with attempts to contain the epidemic that is curiously relevant to today. A smallpox vaccine existed in 1837, but Mr. Pilcher noted "it is a verry delicate experiment among those wild Indians, because death from any other cause, while under the influence of Vaccination would be attributed to that + no other cause[.]"
Sound familiar?
In 2006, Ward Churchill was found guilty [wikipedia.org] of seven counts of research misconduct by the University of Colorado Ethics Committee. He was fired in 2007. He promptly filed suit, and won a jury trial for wrongful dismissal. The jury followed the instructions to the letter in coming to their conclusion, but recognized Churchill for the lying shitheel he was and awarded him precisely $1.00. (One juror denied any such motivation in a public interview.) A judge vacated the jury verdict on the grounds that the (state) university enjoys quasi-judicial immunity. The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld that decision. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal and in 2013 agreed with both the first judge and the Court of Appeals that the university was immune to suit in these circumstances. The US Supreme Court declined to get involved.
It took 19 years from when Churchill first published his fraudulent bullshit in 1994 to the time when the judicial system finished with the case. It could easily take four or five generations for his lie to finally exit the public consciousness. This despite the fact that humanity currently has the fastest, most ubiquitous communications systems in the history of the species.
"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still getting its boots on." —Mark Twain[1]
----
[1] Except Samuel Clemens never wrote that. He was first credited with saying it in 1919, though he had died in 1910. The earliest known version [quoteinvestigator.com] of the sentiment in English was written by Jonathan Swift in 1710. His version was, "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it;".
Re:Here's a thought.... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm aware that Ward Churchill has fraudulently claimed that the 1837 outbreak was caused by an attempt at genocide by the US military using plague blankets. However, that was not the only incident. [wikipedia.org] In fact there is hard evidence of intentional genocide using plague blankets as bioweapons against the native Americans by the British military.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop spreading lies [umich.edu]. Or at least post proof.
You're replying to the wrong comment
Re: (Score:2)
And here's proof
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That was a LONG time ago and different situation...the lands of the world were all up for grabs.
They're talking about Aboriginal and Native American populations. The lands weren't vacant and up for grabs. They had existing nations with unique cultures, trade routes, economic structure, social structure, political structure, and military.
The lands were already populated. In both cases the native people were less able to defend themselves and consequently lost a war against invaders. One of the spoils of war is writing the history books. In both of these cases the invaders said the land was not owned
Re: (Score:2)
" instead primitive tribes that modern day society has glorified and romanticized in order to make white people feel bad about what they did"
It doesn't matter whether they were primitive or not and the conquering nations absolutely should feel bad - they committed terrible crimes despite their lofty ideals & religious truths. In short, thieving & murdering hypocrites.
Re: (Score:2)
So you support children going to jail to serve the rest of their fathers sentence as well? Should the father die before getting parole?
Re: (Score:2)
"Then the soldiers and colonists conquered fair and square"
That doesn't jibe with history
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if you ignore the fact that most terrorists attacks are being done by native-born citizens or people not from countries on Trump's ban list but instead were radicalized years after immigrating.
Re: (Score:2)
Compare and contrast the number of terrorists from Iran (on "The List") vs. the number of terrorists from Our Friend And Ally, Saudi Arabia (not on The List) and Pakistan (also not). The List just gives Trump supports an illusion of Doing Something; never mind that it is useless and indeed counter-productive.
Most of the crazies have been home-grown (and many have been converts).
Re: (Score:2)
What about all the people who are citizens of western countries and were brainwashed by online videos and radical clerics into committing acts of terror?
Re: (Score:2)
Quit letting people from terrorist prone countries or parts of the world into YOUR country...where they refuse to assimilate and become pots of festering terrorist ideology waiting to unleash itself into the host country.
We would, but given America is one of the biggest military powers in the world, we don't your boy Trump is going to let us ban you yanks from our shores [wikipedia.org]. Meanwhile we are currently important plane-loads of Irish to do jobs Australians are simply too educated to want to do, so we can't exactly ban them either [wikipedia.org].
But you're probably right. In an ideal world we would ban Americans and Irish from our shores to help protect us from countries that are literal breeding grounds for terrorists.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes and no, while an ISP can trivially block certain traffic they wouldn't be able to block encryption as a whole so easily. It would be a never ending game of cat and mouse as ISPs struggle to figure out every possible way to obfusicate encryption.,Not only does it not solve the problem, it's a huge expense to the ISPs to maintain if it becomes their legal obligation to do so, and if they're not required to maintain the law then it's simply ineffective to begin with. Even using a whitelist of "approved tra
Re: (Score:3)
Host: slashdot.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091102 Firefox/3.5.5 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
Accept-Language: en-us,en;q=0.5
Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate
Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7
Keep-Alive: 300
Connection: keep-alive
Pragma: no-cache
Cache-Control: no-cache
c51f657cd28a29a207d827267934226b59bf44e was actually a pie
Re: (Score:3)
Or
host c51f657cd28a29a207d827267934226b59bf44e.slashdot.org
No need for http
Re: (Score:2)
Unauthorized encryption can be trivially blocked by your ISP.
- considering that bit patterns can represent all sorts of things, from words, to images, to numeric data of various types of which requires software that interprets specific bit fields as said pieces of data, how do you actually do this efficiently, and without false positives?
The roads (Score:5)
are also being used by people who mean us harm. Shall we shut them all down?
Re: The roads (Score:2)
Your analogy makes no sense. They want intelligence agencies to be able to see what's going on over the internet, and they can already see what's going on over the roads.
It is a car analogy.
Re:The roads (Score:4, Insightful)
Apropos of nothing, I see why Humans can never be immortal: After you put up with a hundred years of the continual BULLSHIT that your own species perpetrates on itself, you just don't want to see any more and WISH to die.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Please do one of two things: Either TAKE YOUR MEDS so you're not your usual obsessive-compulsive uber-pedantic pain-in-the-ass self, or kill yourself, preferably in the most painful way possible..
He CAN'T kill himself, he's immortal. That's why he got annoyed with incorrect uses of the word 'immortal.'
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I've heard that terrorists consume dihydrogen monoxide. We really need to ban this horrible substance once and for all!
If there's no place for terrorists to hide (Score:5, Insightful)
If there's no place for terrorists to hide then there's no place for *anyone* to hide, and that is unacceptable considering how valuable it is to hide from oppression or the abusers of the system used to ensure there are no hiding spots, those who operate the system are disproportionately advantaged and with access comes the capability of concealing themselves, censoring, framing content and concealing context, etc.
This idea is ridiculous and imbalanced off the bat.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Terrorists don't spout their plans all over Twitter's mail like a Trump family member. It won't make any difference to them.
If they backdoor encryption, they backdoor their own security. Putin's boys must be laughing their cocks off at these idiots. All of those backdoors would soon be in their hands, and with it control of Australia. Do they really think only *they* the 'good' guys will use the backdoors they put in?
Do they also want to leave some of the border unguarded?
Why not move their elections online
Re: (Score:2)
Yes the do, but law enforcement takes no notice.
It won't make any difference to them.Correct.
Re: (Score:3)
Putin's boys must be laughing their cocks off at these idiots.
I guess that's a round-about way of fighting the Russians and reducing their population.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a fundamentally fascist idea: The individual does not count and the state-ideology is perfect, hence everybody has to follow it or be a traitor to be eradicated. And because the state-ideology is to great and perfect, of course nobody needs to hide except evildoers.
This of course ignores the little fact that states are the most evil and immoral constructs known to man and need to be kept tightly under control. That control has slipped recently, and what happens as a consequence is not a surprise.
Funny this is from Australia... (Score:4, Interesting)
Exportability (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Jean has a big moustache. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Or a simple book cipher [wikipedia.org], or steganography [wikipedia.org]. It's just too laughably easy for REAL terrorist types to communicate in perfect secrecy. What measures like this are about is for Law Enforcement(TM) types to trivially easily spy on the general populace.
This is the US intelligence services using the Australian intelligence services and Australian law as a monkey's-paw to do an end-run around US restrictions on their collection abilities. The '5-Eyes' sharing agreements means that US 4th-Amensment protections mean squat.
Strat
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Its nice to create and read plain text messages on a smart phone.
Interesting people will soon understand the difference between privacy and anonymity.
The communication was seen between person A and B. Both accounts are been watched by a gov. No more anonymity
The hardware is sent some gov malware or gets a code to start police storage.
That will remove any privacy.
Person A creates a nice long message in plain text and the
Built on the telecommuncations intercept act (Score:3)
You are right, manufacturers will be forced to comply. I wrote to Brandis about this in 2015, it set the stage for what is happening now and was predictable. Not only is the state not interested in protecting her citizens, it is quite clear that monitoring the civilian population is a priority over everything else.
I see little sincerity in the Australian Government on this issue and judging from previous legislations this proposed one will contain as many flaws as the one I wrote about in 2015. We will h
Re: (Score:3)
Sad State of Affairs (Score:2)
What kind of access? (Score:3)
Does the Australian government know that even if they could compel companies like Apple access to their systems, they won't get access to what their users send especially if users are using end-to-end encryption.
And then there's the issue of once they get access to one thing, another app would soon appear that would thwart their suvelliance
Short summary of the issues [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:3)
If its plain text at any time on the device, thats what gov/mil malware will keep.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if the message is ever stored in plain text locally. Otherwise that requires malware to be installed and surveillance software from the device. That's more than access. For example if a user is using end-to-end encrypted messaging app done well the message shows up only as plain text is within the app on the screen. In order to access that text, either the phone/device has to be capturing what is happening on screen. The app could also be set to never save the message once it's been shown.
The other alt
I don't know if this makes sense. (Score:3)
We had similar encrypted channels already in IRC, where some clients provided facilities to encrypt a query with a shared key on both ends.
Currently, with the centralized messenger services running through the infrastructure of big companies, there is a big attack vector on the privacy of communication: Go directly to the provider of the infrastructure. If the encryption runs totally on the client side piggy-backing on the "official" infrastructure, a big single point of failure is removed, although it is still easy to determine when and with whom you communicate.
Obvious response of technology firms (Score:5, Insightful)
The obvious response of technology firms is to structure their encryption so that it becomes impossible for them to decrypt the content because they don't have the keys themselves. The security guys at pretty much every such company would prefer to build such systems anyway. They generally don't because doing so adds some additional layers of complexity. It's simpler and more cost-effective to instead build a key management system that is secure against compromise even by internal attackers, relying on the typical tools (secure hardware, affirmative control, responsibility splitting, etc.).
But... it's not *that* much harder to build a system in which no one but the parties communicating have the keys. Compared to the legal and administrative costs involved in having to deal with an unending stream of government requests for data (which governments almost always expect companies to comply with at their own expense, as a cost of doing business), it's a no-brainer. Much cheaper to build the more complicated decentralized security model, enabling the company to respond to government requests with "Can't. Here's our security design. You can see that we have no access to the decryption keys."
Of course, the obvious response of legislators is then to mandate government-accessible backdoors. That, however, creates an entirely new public perception of the request, making it a very different game, politically.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought, from the way I understood the system, that Apple's iMessage already worked in this manner. I'm not under any delusion that any electronic communications are actually secure and I operate accordingly, but the publicly released documents seem to point to Apple not having access to the keys.
There are other ways around this, of course, such as allowing access to your account to an adversary so they can get their own copy of the keys, etc. This method, at the very least, keeps out the script kiddie ha
Re: (Score:2)
I think its likely that Apple will be asked to provide a back door into the OS so that plain text can be captured before it is encrypted.
Re: (Score:2)
Now if I remember correctly lavabit had a setup like this so they couldn't access the information so the gov't demanded their SSL key so they could pull a MITM and intercept the user's key.
Re: (Score:3)
Now if I remember correctly lavabit had a setup like this so they couldn't access the information so the gov't demanded their SSL key so they could pull a MITM and intercept the user's key.
Sort of true. Lavabit did have access to the data the government wanted, but avoided logging it so they had only ephemeral access, and no ability to provide the historical records being requested. They could have worked out a deal to provide the future information about the one account in question (Edward Snowden's as it turned out), but were uncooperative, and fairly stupidly so. After Lavabit's obstructionism, the government didn't trust them to selectively provide the information, so the court agreed to
Re: (Score:2)
But... it's not *that* much harder to build a system in which no one but the parties communicating have the keys.
Of course, the obvious response of legislators is then to mandate government-accessible backdoors.
Jesus Christ. Backdoors, smackdoors. Simply have the NSA produce their own public key and force all message suppliers to keep on doing whatever they're doing AND ALSO encrypt the original message with the NSA key while appending it to the coded message. That way "ONLY" the NSA or proxy can decode the 2nd message while leaving the application-normal routines in place.
Of course it'll be illegal to remove the alternate key and most people won't know how to do that to start with. Thus
(A) you can read an
Re: (Score:2)
But... it's not *that* much harder to build a system in which no one but the parties communicating have the keys. Of course, the obvious response of legislators is then to mandate government-accessible backdoors.
Jesus Christ. Backdoors, smackdoors. Simply have the NSA produce...
Um, what you described is a backdoor. Pretty much exactly the one proposed in 1993, intended to be implemented in the Clipper chip [wikipedia.org]. Notice how well that succeeded. That's what I meant when I said:
Re: (Score:2)
And what about messages that go outside of NSA jurisdiction.
The Internet doesnt respect borders.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Obvious response of technology firms (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple does that already. It was an engineering solution to a legal problem.
It's the obvious and predictable response of a security engineer.
However, I don't think Apple has actually fixed that "hole" yet. What the FBI was asking them to do was to provide an updated version of the firmware which bypassed the brute force mitigations on password checks. There was much discussion back then about which iPhone versions have the "secure enclave" and which don't, but the secure enclave also has updatable firmware.
However, there are ways to fix this, and I suspect that Apple is working on one for the iPhone8. I think the best solution (and I should note that my day job is Android crypto security, so I've given it more than a passing thought) is to make the firmware update process require that the user first unlock the device. There are a variety of ways to do that, and make the requirement cryptographically strong.
It should be noted that this is a general-purpose security feature, not one specifically targeted at securing against law enforcement. Without it, the security of user data can never be stronger than the internal access controls around the firmware signing key. Any employee or group of employees who have access to that key (or anyone who can bribe, extort or otherwise coerce said employees) can sign new firmware that can erode the security. The fact that it was a government attempt to coerce them to do it doesn't mean the government is the only entity who could. It's much better for user security if no one can.
Really, if Apple had a backdoor, or was forced to make one for the Gov, I guarantee that Apple would be forced to build an entire building that holds nothing but staff to respond to these requests 24/7.
Not true. If Apple (or any other company) were forced to build a government backdoor, most likely it would be the government that holds the keys, so Apple would never be involved in any of the government accesses.
Honestly, if you had a government agency that you could trust enough, such as the courts themselves, maybe, this might not be such a bad approach. That's a really, really big "if", though. The technical challenges in securing such high-value keys are not insurmountable, but they're very high, and if the keys leak, the damage to the companies who make the affected devices would be huge. Further, at least in the US the organization we would most trust to get the technical design and implementation right, the NSA, is the organization we'd want to keep furthest from the whole thing. And even if all of the technical infrastructure was perfect, then the agency would also have to make sure that its processes for approving access are airtight and have adequate oversight to prevent abuse.
Yeah... let's just not go there. Police work is only easy in a police state, and we don't want a police state.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's quite possible they could do that, but then every other nation-state on Earth would be demanding the same type of access. So in effect, when you choose what region you live in (or traveling too) in iOS, it encrypts with that nations certificate that would allow said nation to access the content on the iPhone upon request.
Perhaps. I don't think that could happen secretly, though.
It might be one of the many reasons Apple is building a datacenter in China in fact.
That makes no sense. They wouldn't need to build a data center in China to include a Chinese backdoor public key in their devices, assuming they were willing to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Publish a readonly chain of all firmware builds that you have ever produced. Equivalent to a adding the firmware blob of every release version to a git commit history. Encourage other people to monitor that log.
Then have the current firmware verify that its own hash, and the hash of the new firmware is in the commit history for the release log.
Re: (Score:2)
Publish a readonly chain of all firmware builds that you have ever produced. Equivalent to a adding the firmware blob of every release version to a git commit history. Encourage other people to monitor that log.
Then have the current firmware verify that its own hash, and the hash of the new firmware is in the commit history for the release log.
Not useful :-)
It doesn't matter how many people are verifying that the official log of releases contains no funny business. It only matters that the device can be convinced to accept an update. The attacker just needs to force the device to download a log of his own creation, with his blob's hash appended. You can try to prevent this by having the device check the TLS server certificate when it downloads, or by signing the log, but the assumed attackers have access to internal, restricted private keys, so
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, I run a small business https://matador.cloud/ [matador.cloud] which sells Tahoe-LAFS grids. And I'm not the only one; https://leastauthority.com/ [leastauthority.com] is another. I take pride and solace in how I cannot read my users' uploaded files.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The smart response by users would be to stop relying on technology firms. Encryption software is a free commodity. Putting some "firm" in charge of your software is just a way of adding a point of failure.
It's easier. The problem is that users don't do it / use it. See my first paragraph? I gave great advice, but nobody follows it.
Not even me.
That's because it's actually not so easy. Key management is hard.
WHY CAN'T THEY LEARN!!?! (Score:4, Funny)
Mathematicians, scientists, and politicians (Score:5, Insightful)
When mathematicians say something is impossible, they usually mean "logically inconsistent with published proofs, and those proofs are the basis of EVERYTHING".
When scientists say something is impossible, they usually mean "inconsistent with published models, and those models are good enough to take us to the moon and back".
When politicians say something is impossible, they usually mean "the current legislature will say no, but that can be changed".
When politicians hear "secure encryption with back doors is impossible", they hear "impossible" in legislative terms when it's really at least in scientific terms, and very close to mathematical terms.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Terminally dumb, unable to learn and unable to listen to actual experts. The human race cannot afford the politicians in power all over the globe.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, honestly, in all seriousness: Are you saying that what happens here, is that these politicians have credible, credentialled, PhD-level, trusted expert technical advisors, telling them "What you want is inviting disaster, for X, Y, and Z reasons", and the politicians are saying "LOL,
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians are the poster-people for the Dunning-Kruger effect: They have the biggest egos and the smallest understanding of how things actually work. Of course they do not listen to advisers, because really dumb people think they already know all the truths. Unfortunately, democracy does not help either, because most voters are timid sheep and easily frightened to stampede in any direction desired. Hence fascism raises its ugly head gain. That did not take long.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. The level of stupidity demonstrated is truly astounding.
Re: (Score:2)
backdoor' into ANY encryption algorithm, that your DESTROY it's ability to keep sensitive data out of the hands of the very people you're trying to 'protect' against!?
Does it really? Are you sure that encryption is the ONLY thing that keeps government secrets out of enemy hands?
Before encryption, the government agencies were quite decent at keeping secrets. Maybe they think that they still can if encryption were weakened or gone.
rolleyes (Score:5, Insightful)
Encryption, the best tool to detect ignorance on politicians.
We should all be using it to give politicians with stupid proposals the boot.
Good luck. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck legislating math.
They've certainly done it before. Encryption above certain key lengths used to be illegal to export, and software that was secure came with enough restrictions that it was a pretty big barrier for use.
Criminalize privacy... (Score:2)
...and only criminals will have privacy.
Access to encrypted message granted, contents are: (Score:2)
The problem with this (Score:2)
So are roads. And toilets. Especially toilets.
Not a chance (Score:2)
Present day modern cryptography already can be secure "forever" (i.e. unless somebody finds a fundamental weakness in the cipher itself, brute-forcing will not ever be possible). That war has long been lost by the government creeps that feel threatened by anything they cannot control. All they can do now is a lot of damage.
Re: (Score:2)
People trust the app creator and the legal/freedom branding of their US OS. Governments just have to stay deeper in both smartphones.
To get back to cryptography that can be secure the message would have to be created by hand or on an air gapped device. Then photographed as a code ready message.
Move the code photo file to another computer at the other end, O
Re: (Score:2)
Far, far too difficult. You get pretty perfect security long before that.
The link to TFA is wrong. (Score:2)
Re:better idea (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, when we have radical Presbyterians running around, driving trucks through crowds on holidays, gunning down co-workers on Xmas party days, and bombing outside of concerts and just generally shooting and blowing up groups of innocent people....we can start worrying about those damned jihadist Christians then....but, until then, why don't we try to address the problems folks at hand now, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
This post is a joke right? American-born, non-Muslims kill more people in a year in mass shootings than all Muslim terrorist attacks combined.
Re: (Score:2)
This post is a joke right? American-born, non-Muslims kill more people in a year in mass shootings than all Muslim terrorist attacks combined.
This is a joke right? You know that ISIS were killing faster than statisticians count [thedailybeast.com].
Re:better idea (Score:4, Insightful)
I looked up the numbers [state.gov] and terrorists kill about 28,000 people a year worldwide. And most of them are likely Muslims that the terrorists don't think are in the "right" sect.
From the linked article: "More than 55% of all attacks took place in five countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Nigeria), and 74% of all deaths due to terrorist attacks took place in five countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Syria, and Pakistan)."
Terrorism in countries like the US or Australia is actually vanishingly low. It's touted as a horrible threat by politicians to take away rights and to get themselves more power, but you're more likely to die in a car accident than from a terrorist. (There are 37,000 road accident deaths in the US per year and 1.3 million worldwide - Source [asirt.org].)
If people want to ban all Muslims because of the tiny risk of terrorism, why aren't we banning all motor vehicles to combat the higher risk of automobile-related deaths?
Watcha gonna do? (Score:3)
In Australia, every year, cops kill more people than terrorists do.
Re: (Score:2)
Timeline of Irish National Liberation Army actions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Incident No.
Injury 47,541
Shooting incident 36,923
Armed robbery 22,539
People charged with paramilitary offences 19,605
Bombing and attempted bombing 16,209
Arson 2,225
Re: (Score:2)
And today present date....who should you fear violence from more...the IRA or whomever, or the muslim jihadists?
I"m not afraid of many Irish groups coming to my shores and flying planes into buildings or shooting up Xmas parties....
Re:better idea (Score:4, Informative)
Bad example...the Crusades were a reaction to the Muslims overtaking the "Holy Land"...and not letting Christians in....it was a defensive move back in the day.
Once again, the Muslims were the initial aggressors.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad example...the Crusades were a reaction to the Muslims overtaking the "Holy Land"...and not letting Christians in....it was a defensive move back in the day.
Once again, the Muslims were the initial aggressors.
All those lands have been passed around from conquering civilization to conquering civilization. Why would some Englander have cared whether some tribe came in and rolled through Judea? Oh... right. They're Holy Lands. They're Christian, so of course, they'll go to war.. for God.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're confusing the Inquisition with the Crusades.
Regardless....all the other religions have civilized and aren't in the business of widespread killing of those not of their particular brand of religion...except for the stone age Muslims.
It is they who need to come into the 21st century and learn to live and tolerate others.
Many of the other religions aren't perfect, but they're a darn site better and SAFER than the present day muslims.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey look guys, found the defeatist NSA shill!
Re: (Score:2)
Show and surveillance of common people. These are the same government creeps that want to look into your bedroom to make sure you do not do anything "unwanted".
Re: (Score:2)
No he just made a promise to Trump.