Well, you should probably publish them, because nobody in academia or industry is aware of such solutions. It’s not an absolutist position based on ideology, it’s based on technology/math. It’s...
"We are confident that there are technical solutions that will allow lawful access to encrypted data and communications by law enforcement, without materially weakening the security provided by encryption."
Well, you should probably publish them, because nobody in academia or industry is aware of such solutions.
In his diatribe, Barr is only picking up where predecessors left off. In 2017, then-deputy AG Rod Rosenstein said in an interview that the tech community's "absolutist position" on strong encryption impeded law enforcement and was "unreasonable."
It’s not an absolutist position based on ideology, it’s based on technology/math. It’s simply impossible to make encryption strong and weak.
FBI Director Christopher Wray said last year that developing a process for allowing government officials lawful entry into encrypted communications would "entail varying degrees of innovation by the industry," but he said he didn't "buy the claim that it's impossible."
You don’t have to believe it for it to be true. That’s the funny thing about the truth—it remains constant regardless of your beliefs.
These guys (Barr, Rosenstein, Wray) are either stooges, or playing some political game. I have a feeling they’re all too intelligent and informed to be stooges, so there’s presumably some political component here, but I guess I’m not seeing the big picture of what they stand to gain by pressing Apple and others to ruin their products.
I have trouble reconciling this viewpoint with the fact that these guys have risen to the very top echelons of very important institutions in the US. Surely, even if they themselves have no...
I have trouble reconciling this viewpoint with the fact that these guys have risen to the very top echelons of very important institutions in the US. Surely, even if they themselves have no interest or direct comprehension of the subject of encryption, they have qualified people reporting to them who could explain it? It’s incredibly frightening to think otherwise.
Yeah, you would think that we would live in a technocracy where the people who are experts are in charge of those things, but it turns out high politics position in this administration are mostly...
Yeah, you would think that we would live in a technocracy where the people who are experts are in charge of those things, but it turns out high politics position in this administration are mostly given out as favors for donations and support, and the expertise is mostly spent on keeping their branch of government from spending money and killing it dead.
One of the commenters in the Ars thread said it best: "Nerd harder!" But if we could magically create some new kind of math through sheer force of will, we'd be better off applying our reality...
Well, you should probably publish them, because nobody in academia or industry is aware of such solutions.
One of the commenters in the Ars thread said it best: "Nerd harder!"
But if we could magically create some new kind of math through sheer force of will, we'd be better off applying our reality warping powers towards inventing quantum computers that can just crack all the encryption. Or maybe just cold fusion.
CGP Grey said it best: No matter how much we might wish it, there's no way to build a digital lock that only angels can open and demons can not. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the...
No matter how much we might wish it, there's no way to build a digital lock that only angels can open and demons can not. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the mathematics or less of an angel than they appear.
Well, you should probably publish them, because nobody in academia or industry is aware of such solutions.
It’s not an absolutist position based on ideology, it’s based on technology/math. It’s simply impossible to make encryption strong and weak.
You don’t have to believe it for it to be true. That’s the funny thing about the truth—it remains constant regardless of your beliefs.
These guys (Barr, Rosenstein, Wray) are either stooges, or playing some political game. I have a feeling they’re all too intelligent and informed to be stooges, so there’s presumably some political component here, but I guess I’m not seeing the big picture of what they stand to gain by pressing Apple and others to ruin their products.
Oh, I bet they have people on their staff that can tell them. They just want to invent their own reality.
I have trouble reconciling this viewpoint with the fact that these guys have risen to the very top echelons of very important institutions in the US. Surely, even if they themselves have no interest or direct comprehension of the subject of encryption, they have qualified people reporting to them who could explain it? It’s incredibly frightening to think otherwise.
Yeah, you would think that we would live in a technocracy where the people who are experts are in charge of those things, but it turns out high politics position in this administration are mostly given out as favors for donations and support, and the expertise is mostly spent on keeping their branch of government from spending money and killing it dead.
One of the commenters in the Ars thread said it best: "Nerd harder!"
But if we could magically create some new kind of math through sheer force of will, we'd be better off applying our reality warping powers towards inventing quantum computers that can just crack all the encryption. Or maybe just cold fusion.
CGP Grey said it best:
No matter how much we might wish it, there's no way to build a digital lock that only angels can open and demons can not. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the mathematics or less of an angel than they appear.
Once math is able to block out humans from calculating it with malicious intentions then this problem is an easy fix.