The Battle to Control Encryption

One has to wonder what cause could unite such diverse groups as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Rifle Association (NRA) and conservative Christian group the Eagle Forum. They are all lending their support and backing to a bill currently making its way through the House of Representatives. The Security and Freedom through Encryption Act (a.k.a SAFE), championed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va, is on a collision course with a different encryption bill being backed by the FBI and the Whitehouse known as the Secure Public Networks Act. The Secure Public Networks Act would require that the master key to any encrypted communication be placed in a "vault" so to speak where the government or law enforcement can get to it if need be. Essentially, the government doesn't want you to be able to encrypt things so that they can't read it.

For more info see this MSNBC.com article: Odd Coalition Rallies for Encryption Bill

So I think I'd rather be SAFE than SORRIER

(SORRIER: So Our Representatives Respect Individual's Encryption Rights)

;)

What else is the government going to take from us? I can see their point of view but if someone doesn't want the government to see something they will make sure the government doesn't see it.

If this plan goes into affect all a person has to do is get the "password file" and think about how much damage they could do?

Wow!

I don't like the idea very much!

Nothing like taking away more of our freedoms. It is seeming more like "Land of the free, home of the slaves." The problem is that the government is just scared of everything. What they are doing is not a solution to the problem. I would think that a 10 year old kid could figure that out.

Not only that, but nothing like creating a nice big repository of encryption keys. I bet that wouldn't be a target or anything. On top of all of this crap, who is watching our government? I feel that our government needs to take a different approach to how they are handling problems.

I am a ex-military myself and I know that the times I was deployed overseas fighting for my country I was not fighting so that our wonderful little country could take away our freedoms. This is something I feel very strongly about. I think that everyone should let their elected representatives know how they feel about this crap. It is stupid. Sorry I am done voicing my opinion now........

I doubt they (the Secure Public Networks Act) will be successful with this. Given their "wonderful" success with Clipper, there is a precendent in place that the government shouldn't have this kind of absolute control. Granted the American public and government is more "paranoid" about "terrorist" activities, I have strong doubts that the courts will allow for infringements on individual rights. Even if it becomes law, the first court case with it will probably strike it down...

[sarcasm] Good thing our Goverment supports privacy. [/sarcasm] WTFing HELL!!!! I am 16 and by the time I am 18, I wont even be able to vote. Our country is going to hell, I should move to Canada :-/. Seriously, first you cant export encryption technology, ok. Now they want to be able to read everything? Besides, I didn't think RSA would have a key, so short of having a mainframe full of everybodies induvidual key.... As sysmin770 stated, not like it's a juicy target, not like it would contain the entire countries private keys.... Oh wait, it would. And with Goverment security sucking much ass, I might even be able to pull it off, but probably not. :p That may have been a bit immature, but if this passes our country has bigger issues than terrorists. And, if this is done because of terrorists they have accomplished exactly what they wanted, to ruin our way of life. Bush said, "They[terrorists] will not ruin our way of life." He has lied most blatantly and changed our country in ways that are ruining what made this country special.

-Jessus is coming!!! Quick, everybody look busy!!!-

Interesting, as the UK government (who seem to be increasingly in favour of a police state), introduced similar powers in 2000 with their RIP act.
Important note here that this was before 9 11.

However, in practice, it doesn't seem to be fully implemented.
If you wish to read the rather alarming legislation, which is now part of UK law, look at:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/a...00023.htm#aofs

This is almost certainly a direct contravention of EU law, which supersedes UK law in these matters.

To quote from a BBC news report at the time (which also mentions Echelon):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1363841.stm

"However, British citizens should be aware that the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act gives law enforcement agencies the right to demand decryption keys from anyone, and it imposes prison sentences on those that refuse to hand them over.

The RIP Act also forbids people, under threat of prison, from telling anyone that they have been asked to hand over their key. In at least two reports legal experts have condemned these decryption powers as a breach of human rights. "

The Echelon quote was:

"This week saw the publication of a long-awaited European Commission report on the Echelon electronic eavesdropping network.

The report confirmed the existence of the network, which is operated by intelligence services in US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, and revealed that it had the ability to routinely tap phone calls and faxes as well as almost any type of net-based communication.

The report recommended that citizens and businesses routinely use encryption technologies to scramble electronic messages to ensure that if Echelon captures them it will be unable to decipher them."

It all reminds me of Orwell's 1984.

Goverments, not just the US, but all goverments do things in the names of some cause. Wether it be safety, security, or eliminating a certain race of people, all goverments make the rules that they do for some sort of ideal that they are trying to support. Will the goverment someday have a key for all encrypted communications, probably. The fact though that they are trying to get all peoples to see the reason for their cause is their ultimate mistake. Cause there will always be some groups that don't agree just for the sake of disagrement.

Someday the U.S.A. will be no more, and maybe then a goverment will take its place that is focused on personal freedoms as it cause, much the way USA orignally did to Britan in the American Revolution. The whole process will start anew. The goverment will slowly take away more freedoms for the cause of security untill the people feel repressed and renew the cycle.

Am I unhappy that freedoms are being taken away, yes I most certainly am. But I know there is nothing I can do to stop it, there is just not enough public interest to rally any major suport to stop it. So untill there is, which may or may not happen in my life time, I enjoy life.

A wise man once said, "Boy your going to get ****ed, you might as well bend over and get it over with. Struggling is just going to make it that much more painfull."

Well I don't really know if he was wise, but I liked him. :)

Just my thoughts

DeafLamb

Quote:

---

A wise man once said, "Boy your going to get ****ed, you might as well bend over and get it over with. Struggling is just going to make it that much more painfull."

Well I don't really know if he was wise, but I liked him.

---

Lol. Just as a question, am I like a thread killer? When I post, threads seem to whither and die, what am I doing wrong?

Lucky me, I live in a country where encryption is allowed in all forms !!

Lucky me, I have a job where https secured webmail is allowed !!

Lucky me, I can have all the filthy little secrets I want !!



This is starting to get scary.. I'm on one line with the NRA on this one !!

A safe with all the master key's.. lol lmfao roflmao
Let's go back in time !!
Fort Knox !!

And who will be the master of the keys ?? (motk in cinema's 2030)

Now for a little Q and A:

Who said this, when and at what occasion:

Quote:

---

"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to insure our domestic security and protect our homeland. "

---

ready for it ??

It was Adolph Hitler in 1922 celebrating the creation of the Gestapo (secret police)

Odd how much it sounds like G.W. Bush today. (well the last two years !!)

I still think the best way to fight is along these lines : http://www.antionline.com/showthread...631#post647212

Make the agencies read everything on the net, all the time.

They will not have enough resource to do so.

<aside> Bloody hell it's snowing here! </aside>

Steve

SNOW! :D

Appart from that, Say they would stick all the keys in a vault....how many keys would there be? How many tries would they have to do? In the end it would simply end up having to bruteforce it due to the sheer number of keys. And then what? Doulbe encryption? Multi cipher? Shifting? Twisting? Seriously, it's not possible, never mind being agains moral rights of privacy. I for one would spend all day spitting out keys just to make their life hell!

- Noia

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Noia
SNOW! :D
I for one would spend all day spitting out keys just to make their life hell!

- Noia

---

Snow's turned to raid & mist now.

What a good idea - flood them with keys.

Steve

make a dedicated 486 generate key after key after key for as long as you suply power to it..

lol, yeah..

But I read that it would be a "master key" kind-of-way..
wich would mean that people will have to be forced to use their "new" way of encryption instead of ssl/pgp..

the master key principle could work..

instead of the public - private key system we all use, it would have to be a public - private - master but that would make crypto challenges like the RSA's factoring challenge a very dangerous thing..

In a public - private key system, it is possible to get a key, it just takes too damn long for that key to be usefull !!
In a public - private - master key system, it will not take longer to get the master key, but a hell of a lot more dangerous !!

well that's all for my input before coffee !!

Well I am inclined to jump on the bandwagon like everyone else and cry Hitler and George Orwell and on and on. I love my privacy and I am definitely inclined to support SAFE over anything the FBI introduces. But it's kind of ludicrous. I mean encryption has gotten to the point that there are hundreds of methods and product with virtually unbreakable keys, even given Moore’s law into consideration the governement couldn't break some software of the street. So it wouldn't be very en-forcible. But then again, I think: wow, eventually the government is not going to have a way to monitor anything. Organized crime and criminals will run free and control the country again. I know how all of AO hates child pornographers based on another thread. What if those *******s could exchange their wares and never get caught? Except perhaps, by accident when actually physically caught with camera in hand. Makes me think, but for now I actually read parts of the bill and formed my own opinion. This is a democracy and if you don't like it vote the f@ckers out - call their offices and talk to them.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Mssrs, McCain, Kerrey and Hollings introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on…

There they are the culprits….

Quote:

---

SEC. 101. LAWFUL USE OF ENCRYPTION.
Except as otherwise provided by this Act or otherwise provided by law, it shall be lawful for any person within any State to use any encryption, regardless of encryption algorithm selected, encryption key length chosen, or implementation technique or medium used.

---

Ok that's cool; I can USE encryption and anything that is on the market.

Quote:

---

SEC. 102. PROHIBITION ON MANDATORY THIRD PARTY ESCROW OF KEYS USED FOR ENCRYPTION OF CERTAIN COMMUNICATIONS.

Neither the Federal Government nor a State may require the escrow of an encryption key with a third party in the case of an encryption key used solely to encrypt communications between private persons within the United States.

---

That stated the government can't force someone to participate in the Key Management system. That's OK as well.

Quote:

---

SEC. 103. VOLUNTARY PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION IN KEY MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE.

The participation of the private persons in the key management infrastructure enabled by this Act is voluntary.

---

Again that states from a citizen perspective that participation is voluntary.

Quote:

---

SEC. 104. UNLAWFUL USE OF ENCRYPTION

Whoever knowingly encrypts data or communications in furtherance of the commission of a criminal offense for which the person may be prosecuted in a court of competent jurisdiction and may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than one year shall, in addition to any penalties for the underlying criminal offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, for a first conviction or fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, for a second or subsequent conviction. The mere use of encryption shall not constitute probable cause to believe that a crime is being or has been committed.

---

That says if you knowingly encrypt communications that leads to unlawful acts, like planning a bank robbery over email, you could go to jail. OK, that’s fine too...

Quote:

---

SEC. 105. PRIVACY PROTECTION.

(a) In General. It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally --

(1) obtain or use recovery information without lawful authority for the purpose of decrypting data or communications;
(2) exceed lawful authority in decrypting data or communications;
(3) break the encryption code of another person without lawful authority for the purpose of violating the privacy, security or property rights of that person;
(4) intercept on a public communications network without lawful authority the intellectual property of another person for the purpose of violating the intellectual property rights of that person;
(5) impersonate another person for the purpose of obtaining recovery information of that person without lawful authority;
(6) issue a key to another person in furtherance of a crime;
(7) disclose recovery information in violation of a provision of this Act; or
(8) publicly disclose without lawful authority the plaintext of information that was decrypted using recovery information obtained with or without lawful authority.
(b) Criminal Penalty. Any person who violates this section shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

---

Guys/Gals this actually puts in safeguards that DO NOT EXIST!! Our internet communications do not have the same protection our phone lines do. This would give some of that protection.

More...

The rest of section 1 goes into detail on how the government can recover a key, assuming you take part in their secure network. I see something out of line here with what media is reporting. There is a lot more to the bill but I am out of time for now. Let's look at it and comment on the actual bills and what their strengths and weakness is. Not what Dan Rather, Ted or CNN say. I like article 1 so far.... more later. Peace.
Make your own assumptions… DA BILL

It seems that the scope of the SAFE bill goes beyond just encryption. It also aims at a target near and dear to many of us on AO- the erosion of civil liberties as a result of the PATRIOT Act.

SAFE not only attempts to handle the issue of encryption, it also contains many proposed limitations on the scope of what the FBI and the Justice Dept. can or can't do as related to the powers granted them in the PATRIOT Act.

Read this SecurityFocus article for more information: Senators propose Patriot Act limitations

You can also read the actual text of the proposed bill here: SAFE Act

Or, they could repeal the Patriot Act. Seriously, it has done nothign in the war on terror and just infringed on our rights, mostly the right to privacy. The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are treated better than the prisoners in the United States, and they are war criminals. Personally, I think it is complete bullshit; just a way for Bush/current party to establish dictitorial control of our country via legal means, like Hitler. The thing is, it is not because Bush is very amiable, and charismatic, it is because the Republicans control two thirds of goverment and can rubber stamp anything they want. Conclusion, we very well could turn into a dictitorial state, everybody stock up on guns and ammo in case there needs to be a revolution.
-Jessus is coming!!!!! Everybody look busy!-

This may be simplifiing things. But the prisoners of Guantanomo are held on powers of the patriot act. If it's repealed, don't all those guys/gals get to go free? I am not sure that being active in a terrorist cell is justification of jail time under normal law? Like I said, maybe that's over simplification.

I am not sure its the PATRIOT Act that allows us to hold them. I think its military law that does. Basically, as I understand it, as long as we call them POW's or whatever they fall under military law and Geneva Convention rules rather than civil law.

Under civil law they would have limits on how long they can hold someone and how due process works, etc. But POW's are not afforded the same rights.

My point is that the Patriot Act only infringes on US citizens rights since them at Guantanamo Bay have none. And since we have to obey the Geniva Convention, which is bullshit, we have to treat them nicely... Or we could put them with the axe murderers, the child rapists and such, they [the murderers/rapists] would have a field day, and the terrorists would have a quite different experience.... it would also cut costs.

-It is I, me-

PS: Terrorists arent smarter because they commit acts of terrorism. It is that they have the will, and if they have the will they will obtain the means. It is sort of Machiavelian in nature. They will do whatever necessary to get what they want.

The people held in Guantanamo Bay are not POW's.
If they were, they would be entitled to more rights than they have - like for example a trial or military tribunal? And the US is not, under the Geneva convention, at war.
Strictly speaking, the Geneva convention does not apply.
In US terms they are 'unlawful combatants', which is why they are also being held in a location that does not fall under normal US law.

This is exactly the same thing that the UK government did in Northern Ireland, when it used special powers i.e. prison without trial for those they suspected as being terrorists - didn't see many people in the US supporting that!
As far as I know the majority of Americans supported the IRA terrorist campaign.

To some extent you can see the point of this, but if you really believe they are guilty, then why not put them on trial?? This is a classic case of guilty until proven innocent.

Of course I don't support terrorists, but what the US is trying to say is that after interrogating someone for two years, they still don't have any evidence ????