Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

September 28, 2010 -

In order to combat the decreasing use of archaic telephones, the Obama administration is preparing a bill that would allow law enforcement and national security officials greater access to online communications.

As reported by the New York Times, such a bill would require online services such as Blackberry’s encrypted email system, or social sites like Facebook, to be “technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order.”

Some, like Columbia University’s Steven Bellovin, a Computer Science Professor, see a problem with the mandate, because hackers could figure out how to gain access through the new backdoors. Bellovin called it, “… a disaster waiting to happen.”

Meanwhile, The FBI’s General Counsel Valerie Caproni defended the fledgling bill, stating, “We’re not talking expanding authority. We’re talking about preserving our ability to execute our existing authority in order to protect the public safety and national security.”

Center for Democracy and Technology Vice President James Dempsey was against the proposed measure as well, saying, “They basically want to turn back the clock and make Internet services function the way that the telephone system used to function.”

The current plan is to submit the bill to lawmakers next year.


Comments

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

A shame we no longer believe in guilty before innocent on wait...never mind. And due course and problem able cause backed up by a judges warrant.


How far have we fallen, the government has to much power and is not slowly with powers invested in it by the wooly masses and the corporate herders and ra...er animal "lovers" we are headed for a full fledged authoritarian system were the worker is watched and told what to do and how to do it from the cradle to the cubicle to their apartment and not only are we supporting it we are gleefully awaiting that achievement.

 

We must be wary of government and distrustful of business if not they will take advantage of us, and without us neither would exist, there is a balance to things and humanity is mostly ill prepared for them.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

Ridiculous.

A digital system is either secure, totally, or it is insecure. There is no backdoor system that will ensure only the "right" people can have access. Any vulnerability in a system will be exploited by malicious individuals. Not "may be" or "could be," will be. Government agencies routinely fail cybersecurity audits. The idea that they will be able to keep the keys to my system secure when they can't even do it with the keys to their own systems is laughable.

What the administration is saying, really and truly, is that they want to make Americans more vulnerable all of the time to people seeking to do them harm, in the interests of protecting them some of the time. That logic doesn't pass muster.

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

 And people wonder why net neutrality is a big issue? You really want THESE people having full control over your internet? It'll start out with cell phones and websites, soon it'll move to God knows where. Just think of what they would do if they had control over something like that. 

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

You forget that when the government wanted communications info with shady legal justification, all they had to do was ask (and promise to protect from lawsuits). Leaving the internet in the hands of the telecoms is no protection for freedoms or privacy. Bucking the government is rarely profitable, and profit is all they care about.

I can vote out Obama, and any of my representatives that support this. I can't vote out Cox. There is no other option in my area.

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

You don't really think that "voting out those who support this" is an effective deterrent against misuse, do you?

If we give the government the ability to control the internet with a net neutrality bill, this is EXACTLY what they will do.  Don't be so stupid as to think otherwise.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

And you somehow think private entities with regional monopolies have any incentive to "behave?"

They've already proven they'll throw customer rights to the wind at government request. There is nothing to stop them, short of lawsuits, and it's already been proven the government will shield them from that too if they play ball.

You're placing trust in entities that have proven at least as untrustworthy as politicians, and with even less accountability.

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

Had this been proposed by Bush, there would literally (and rightfully) have been protests in the streets and tons of news coverage.  Of course, responsible citizenship and journalism seems to end when the "correct" leadership is in place.  :(

 

 

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

Bias?  What bias?  ;)

Re: Obama Seeks Greater Access to Online Communication

Because apparently the UAE is the government we want to emulate.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?t=18&v=CbGmrySQLIg looks like Inafune is giving capcom the middle finger.07/02/2015 - 5:05pm
TechnogeekUnfortunately, the shoutbox moves fast enough that I can't find why I got that impression, so if was indeed erroneous I do apologize.07/02/2015 - 4:34pm
TechnogeekBut yeah, as far as my earlier comment re: you and the article, I did get the impression at some point that you felt there should have been some sort of reprecussions for the article's existence.07/02/2015 - 4:34pm
TechnogeekI got expletive-censored for posting something a few weeks back wherein I expressed my shock that I agreed with you about something, Skunk; so you're not the only one being hit with that stick.07/02/2015 - 4:31pm
Andrew EisenI know you don't. And you haven't recently so all's well.07/02/2015 - 4:25pm
Goth_SkunkI don't think I misrepresented anything.07/02/2015 - 4:24pm
Andrew EisenHeavy profanity is not permitted in the Shout box. Words like "moron" are but we ask that our readers not resort to name-calling.07/02/2015 - 4:23pm
Goth_SkunkSo I can't say a 4-letter curse word, but Mechacrash is free to call me a moron. Acknowledgment: Mecha was warned about his conduct, but his post was not edited, as mine was.07/02/2015 - 4:20pm
Andrew EisenWhat people took issue with was your misrepresentation of what the author said. Now that you're criticizing what she actually said, no one has a problem (though they might disagree with your opinion).07/02/2015 - 4:19pm
Andrew EisenThat's not comparable at all. One is advice, one is a rule.07/02/2015 - 4:17pm
Goth_SkunkBut apparently, people seem to take issue with my justification and have been jumping down my throat about it for... 24 hours?07/02/2015 - 4:17pm
Goth_SkunkAnd now we've just had an example wherein I was forced to moderate myself in order to minimize offense.07/02/2015 - 4:16pm
Goth_SkunkThat's what this whole conundrum's been about! I strongly disapproved with the Wired article writer's suggestion and made that opinion known here in the shoutbox.07/02/2015 - 4:16pm
Andrew EisenPlease keep such strong language out of the Shout box. Anyway, that's fine. If there's something you want to write about. Go right ahead. Don't like someone's suggestion? Feel free to say so.07/02/2015 - 4:13pm
Goth_SkunkIf I get a response "this rape scene you wrote was offensive. You should've done it differently. Consider examples A, B, C, or D" I would happily take it under advisement should I decide to write something similar in the future.07/02/2015 - 4:12pm
Goth_SkunkIf I get backlash for such a decision consisting of "this rape scene was offensive," that's fine. If I get criticism like "this rape scene was so offensive, you shouldn't have written it," I'll respond "Go (expletive) yourself"07/02/2015 - 4:11pm
Andrew EisenMatthew - Oh, absolutely. But no one's saying any specific trope or subject should be taboo.07/02/2015 - 4:11pm
Andrew EisenA few have opined that I should have left the "I'm on a whore" line out of my Old Spice Parody video. I don't see why that's a problem.07/02/2015 - 4:10pm
Goth_SkunkHypothetical: If I'm writing a story and in my story there is a rape scene, and that rape scene is present because I want it to be there, and it is very relevant to the story as a whole, I'm going to write it.07/02/2015 - 4:10pm
Matthew WilsonI think it should be criticized for being used badly, but I dissagree with the idea that is should never be used. as far as I am concerned its a story telling tool, and like all tools it can be used in a good or bad way.07/02/2015 - 4:09pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician