Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bauglir]

Geez, the ride never ends, I guess.

[nenjin]

Geez, the ride never ends, I guess.

Buckle up, we haven't even hit the crest yet.

Personally, I'm waiting for the next Nixon we know is coming to utilize this machinery against different domestic groups and opponents.

[Bauglir]

So, uh, right now? Or are you looking for something more centralized, for more obvious personal gain?

EDIT: Hopefully an acceptable source, I just did a quick google search and went with something that seemed reputable.

[alway]

Feds Beg NY Times, Pro Publica Not To Reveal That They've Inserted Backdoors Into Internet Encryption
From the too-fucking-bad department.

Seriously though, it just keeps going deeper and fucking deeper. Makes you wonder just how much stuff Snowden actually made off with. I don't know if I should hope for more or less.

This... is actually really bad. Like, everything else in this thread pales in comparison to this. It undermines basically everything modern society is built upon. Because you know what? I don't give a shit if terrorists knock down a building or two. I do give a shit about the possibility of the entire global economic system being knocked out of commission. This is an agency which can't keep out whistleblowers, let alone an actually malevolent entity from a criminal or spy organization, and they've now wired backdoors which allow pretty much the entire digital economy to be knocked out which are protected only by their being kept secret.

[misko27]

Feds Beg NY Times, Pro Publica Not To Reveal That They've Inserted Backdoors Into Internet Encryption
From the too-fucking-bad department.

Seriously though, it just keeps going deeper and fucking deeper. Makes you wonder just how much stuff Snowden actually made off with. I don't know if I should hope for more or less.

This... is actually really bad. Like, everything else in this thread pales in comparison to this. It undermines basically everything modern society is built upon. Because you know what? I don't give a shit if terrorists knock down a building or two. I do give a shit about the possibility of the entire global economic system being knocked out of commission. This is an agency which can't keep out whistleblowers, let alone an actually malevolent entity from a criminal or spy organization, and they've now wired backdoors which allow pretty much the entire digital economy to be knocked out which are protected only by their being kept secret.

When you put it like that...

Jesus, someone fire the heads and put in someone good.

[da_nang]

Feds Beg NY Times, Pro Publica Not To Reveal That They've Inserted Backdoors Into Internet Encryption
From the too-fucking-bad department.

Seriously though, it just keeps going deeper and fucking deeper. Makes you wonder just how much stuff Snowden actually made off with. I don't know if I should hope for more or less.

This... is actually really bad. Like, everything else in this thread pales in comparison to this. It undermines basically everything modern society is built upon. Because you know what? I don't give a shit if terrorists knock down a building or two. I do give a shit about the possibility of the entire global economic system being knocked out of commission. This is an agency which can't keep out whistleblowers, let alone an actually malevolent entity from a criminal or spy organization, and they've now wired backdoors which allow pretty much the entire digital economy to be knocked out which are protected only by their being kept secret.

When you put it like that...

Jesus, someone fire the heads and put in someone good.

I'd vote NSA and GCHQ to be declared terrorists by now.

Cue incarceration and summary execution. Pitchforks and torches aren't enough anymore.

[FearfulJesuit]

I'm still optimistic enough to believe that things will change once all the backdoors and data collection start backfiring. The NSA will be in deep shit when some rogue hacker uses its equipment to undo banking systems.

[olemars]

I'm still optimistic enough to believe that things will change once all the backdoors and data collection start backfiring. The NSA will be in deep shit when some rogue hacker uses its equipment to undo banking systems.

Surveillance logic mandates that abuse of surveillance demands more surveillance to stop it.

[Baffler]

I'm still optimistic enough to believe that things will change once all the backdoors and data collection start backfiring. The NSA will be in deep shit when some rogue hacker uses its equipment to undo banking systems.

I don't think I can be anymore, honestly. I'm not reaching for my pitchfork yet, but I think I may have given up on the whole thing going well for the public at large. Best I can do now is spread the word.

[Mrhappyface]

Just a caution about spreading the word: Don't rely on "they can", "they could", and "what if" because that's only a step up from abusing ethos and pathos and tends to breed misinformation.  Use what has already happened as an argument point.

[SalmonGod]

In my opinion, "has tended to happen in the past under similar circumstances" also works...

[GlyphGryph]

Just a caution about spreading the word: Don't rely on "they can", "they could", and "what if" because that's only a step up from abusing ethos and pathos and tends to breed misinformation.  Use what has already happened as an argument point.

There are significant arguments that can be made with "they can" and if its a situation where they are actually "incentivized to" it becomes a perfectly argument. When we are dealing with things that are exceptionally dangerous the risks of "they can" become perfectly valid - isn't that the entire reason we don't want Iran to get Nuclear Weapons? Because they could use them?

See, here's the thing - our government is built on "you can't". It has ways to enforce that. Because giving people the  ability to do certain things without sufficient safeguards that they won't AKA giving them something they can do and then trusting them not to is a bad idea in general... doing so while giving them every reason TO and "they could" is a perfectly good argument to make.

[GlyphGryph]

Okay sorry for the double post my phone is stupid and wont let me edit posts that long.

"They can" is a perfectly valid for argument for action to insure they cant f we agree the thing they can do is bad.

They equally valid argument against it isn't trying to stop people from saying they can, but demonstrating it would be against their own best interests to do so (or argue that actually they cant)

[Urist McDepravity]

"What if" is perfectly valid too, esp. in case of intentionally making encryption weak. Vulnerabilities, thanks to NSA, are already there and just waiting for some outsider to be found. And they WILL look hard, now knowing that they exist. Considering how easy nowadays is to build custom numbers-crunching rigs (see BC mining rigs people have), its not that hard to achieve enough computational power to exploit w/e vulnerabilities NSA built in.
And we better ask and prepare for "what if" scenarios now, rather than after some rogue hackers crash world economics.

[Baffler]

"What could be" certainly does apply in a lot of situations, but what has already been done is certainly a bit more persuasive than speculation would be. What I see happening in response to this particular bit of news is a rush by software engineers and/or independent actors to come up with new encryption algorithms without these ridiculously counter-intuitive back doors. If that's how it works, my understanding of how these things work isn't what it could be.