Five Governments Call for Encryption Backdoors in Memo

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
In a memo quietly posted by the Australian government last week, members of the "Five Eyes" pact are calling for increased access to encrypted communication services. The memo argues that law enforcement should have access to electronic information in the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations. The intelligence alliance founded by Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the US, and the UK also calls for the "voluntary cooperation of industry partners" with their respective governments, and threatens to "pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions." While governments within the alliance have called for backdoor access in the past, this represents a step up in the alliance's efforts. However, some member countries are pushing separate legislative efforts to stop these kinds of backdoors from being put into place.

The increasing gap between the ability of law enforcement to lawfully access data and their ability to acquire and use the content of that data is a pressing international concern that requires urgent, sustained attention and informed discussion on the complexity of the issues and interests at stake. Otherwise, court decisions about legitimate access to data are increasingly rendered meaningless, threatening to undermine the systems of justice established in our democratic nations.
 
In a memo quietly posted by the Australian government last week, members of the "Five Eyes" pact are calling for increased access to encrypted communication services. The memo argues that law enforcement should have access to electronic information in the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations.

So what happened to "We only use our tools to stop terrorist and those who act against the state?"

Slippery slope brought to you through the act of attrition: A series of small steps that erodes your enemies ability to fight back.

I bet you political leaders won't give a @#$@# until they realized their personal lives have been compromised as well.
 
Because the governments are so good at keeping things locked down, no one could possibly possess this backdoor key. No thanks, if the case is based on needing a text message or photo on a phone, it isn't a strong case to begin with. IMO encryption starts to be useless when everyone has a key to decrypt it and then a new method would just be created to fix that problem.
 
"in the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations"

so... they are saying that, by law, we have to have a backdoor in all our homes, that law enforcement has the key to, so they can use to get in?
They're saying that it's illegal to build highly secure houses that law enforcement would have trouble breaking into if we don't give them the key?
 
the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations"

I think they're using that statement as way to say "via warrant or court order." Not that due process is followed much these days.

Here's my thing, if a backdoor is put into encryption, the normal people will be compromised and the nefarious people will likely start using some form of homebrew encryption.

Cryptography isn't exactly rocket science. You can disguise a message numerous ways (in a photo, cipherkey, container, etc.) and if only the sender/receiver know where to extract this message, it'll be effective.

Backdoors just allow the spy agencies to vacuum up data in mass or easily extract evidence for low-level criminals.
 
I think they're using that statement as way to say "via warrant or court order." Not that due process is followed much these days.

Here's my thing, if a backdoor is put into encryption, the normal people will be compromised and the nefarious people will likely start using some form of homebrew encryption.

Cryptography isn't exactly rocket science. You can disguise a message numerous ways (in a photo, cipherkey, container, etc.) and if only the sender/receiver know where to extract this message, it'll be effective.

Backdoors just allow the spy agencies to vacuum up data in mass or easily extract evidence for low-level criminals.
That's the rub, isn't it? I think the governments were taken aback by their usual "think of the children" argument not working.
 
UK, Australia,NZ ,Canada (British empire legacies) = typical, and expected behavior from their govs. Expect their citizens to just roll over. No proper public discourse and media coverage expected. Absolutely no hope there.

only US citizens can moderate and restrict this, but the you-hack-me, i-hack-you agreement is still around.
 
I'm against people doing harm to other people. Drugs, violence, illegal things of all kinds. But this is just a step to far. The cure is worse then the disease.

I'm certain plenty of those politicians will think twice when this very technology gets used against them.
 
"voluntary cooperation of industry partners" with their respective governments, and threatens to "pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions."
Dear 5 governments, please kindly fuck yourselves!
 
While handing gooberments backdoors to your encrypted products is in itself a really bad thing, everybody knows that they won't be the only ones able to use them a week after they are actually created.

All it takes is for one disgruntled or greedy gooberment employee and the bad guys (the ones outside of the gooberment that is) have unlimited access to your back orifice.
 
"in the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations"

so... they are saying that, by law, we have to have a backdoor in all our homes, that law enforcement has the key to, so they can use to get in?
They're saying that it's illegal to build highly secure houses that law enforcement would have trouble breaking into if we don't give them the key?

in whatever way fits them at that time. Not like the politicians and leaders are holding them accountable

when was the last time anyone asked such questions during a town hall session? ( at least the US still have them. Can't be said for the other countries where Q&A are even more rare, restricted and scripted)
 
UK, Australia,NZ ,Canada (British empire legacies) = typical, and expected behavior from their govs. Expect their citizens to just roll over. No proper public discourse and media coverage expected. Absolutely no hope there.

only US citizens can moderate and restrict this, but the you-hack-me, i-hack-you agreement is still around.

Yes the good old clichés, just the same way that the US government will claim opposing this is supporting terrorism & unpatriotic? The US is hardly a bastion of privacy and people's rights. All the governments behind this are equally to blame.
 
I would say yes if all five governments agreed to accept full liability for all data breaches. They would also agree to fully compensate victims financially and. Last but not least, each government official supporting this would have to sign a form agreeing to the responsibilities above and make a public statement that they accept the responsibility.

Of course, this would not happen. But those would be my terms
 
"in the same way that they have access to "homes, vehicles, and personal effects" in criminal investigations"

so... they are saying that, by law, we have to have a backdoor in all our homes, that law enforcement has the key to, so they can use to get in?
They're saying that it's illegal to build highly secure houses that law enforcement would have trouble breaking into if we don't give them the key?

No matter how secure a house you build, law enforcement has access to military hardware if required to gain entry. You are not going to be able to stop a tank or high explosives. Problem law enforcement has with encryption is that they do not have any tools to decrypt the data and that infuriates them.
 
No matter how secure a house you build, law enforcement has access to military hardware if required to gain entry. You are not going to be able to stop a tank or high explosives. Problem law enforcement has with encryption is that they do not have any tools to decrypt the data and that infuriates them.
In the US, at least, we have this thing called "due process" backed by our Constitution. Law enforcement cannot forcibly enter your property without legal backing. Crime in progress or serving of a warrant are the 2 major ones, and even then they cannot just collect things to try and prove something outside of the scope of the crimes involved.

And if you think law enforcement does not have decryption tools then you are naive. The public battles over encryption have never been about getting access to encrypted data.
 
This is difference.. these ' free' countries ' ask nicely' to screw you out of rights.. ' ask nicely' or pass ' righteous laws' ... Other countries, according to our own 'media' , you know ' impose' things.
I tell people all the time, but i am looked at funny.. you are not really that free in the US.. yes you have some leeway, surely more than less savory countries, but if you organize something anti political or anti elite you get some leeway to see if you fail, but the minute you are a threat in terms of change.. be sure the hammer comes down, all in the name of the law of course.. for the safety of others.
 
Comparing data to houses or cars in invalid. The former are physical objects and as such are simply containers for other things. But data is not; it is more like thought. If we concede the right of the government to decrypted copies of our data, we are one step away from also giving up our private thoughts.
 
... we are one step away from also giving up our private thoughts.

Agree. And that is a failure of social media - those platforms encouraged over-sharing - but it's still not enough.

Get off the [H] train, people. Get back to posting your tedious thoughts on FB/Twitter/Instagram where the state can more easily track your demented private thoughts.

;-)
 
The use of "positive language" in that document sickens me. "providers may create customized solutions, tailored to their individual system architectures that are capable of meeting lawful access requirements. Such solutions can be a constructive approach to current challenges."

So, a backdoor or encryption weakness is constructive now.

Also, the document page ends with a threat. "Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions."
 
Anyway, how long before an open source SW takes the lead and release no backdoor version of encryption and sms app ? This seems to compromise only the typical soccer mom user (example) and not really high profile criminals.
When there's a will there's a way they say... Criminal organisation will pay top dollar to get their own app and call it a day.
 
The use of "positive language" in that document sickens me. "providers may create customized solutions, tailored to their individual system architectures that are capable of meeting lawful access requirements. Such solutions can be a constructive approach to current challenges."

So, a backdoor or encryption weakness is constructive now.

Also, the document page ends with a threat. "Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions."
Its ALL about appearances and and making you feel like you are listened to.. or making you feel like you have all these crazy freedoms.
 
Wouldn't be surprised if encryption becomes illegal unless you're a bank or some govt agency.
 
But they had no problems smearing Kaspersky...

In the US, at least, we have this thing called "due process" backed by our Constitution. Law enforcement cannot forcibly enter your property without legal backing. Crime in progress or serving of a warrant are the 2 major ones, and even then they cannot just collect things to try and prove something outside of the scope of the crimes involved.

And if you think law enforcement does not have decryption tools then you are naive. The public battles over encryption have never been about getting access to encrypted data.
Due process and the constitution won't help you if the government doesn't want it so:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives-loses-appeal/
 
Well duh, name me a government that doesn't want backdoor access to encryption? See the smart ones are the ones who don't make public announcements about it and get the public whipped up in a fever.
 
I AM Shocked!!!!.... that it's only 5 governments would have expected way more.
 
Yes the good old clichés, just the same way that the US government will claim opposing this is supporting terrorism & unpatriotic? The US is hardly a bastion of privacy and people's rights. All the governments behind this are equally to blame.

not cliche if true.
 
It's the 5 Eyes alliance. That's why it's news. Propaganda article trying to push their agenda.

Theoretically, we are the good guys but recent events have called a lot of our usage of intelligence into question.

Generally speaking there should be ways for the people of "free" nations to privately and securely communicate.
 
In the US, at least, we have this thing called "due process" backed by our Constitution. Law enforcement cannot forcibly enter your property without legal backing. Crime in progress or serving of a warrant are the 2 major ones, and even then they cannot just collect things to try and prove something outside of the scope of the crimes involved.

And if you think law enforcement does not have decryption tools then you are naive. The public battles over encryption have never been about getting access to encrypted data.
Sigh, In the US, we used to have "due process". If you look at House Joint Resolution 76 that Trump signed into law 22Aug2017, it gives the newly formed commission “the authority to enter property near the Metro Rail System ‘without limitation’ and without a warrant, for the purpose of ‘making inspections, investigations, examinations, and testing.’”. The US attorney general can declare an emergency and authorize the employment of the surveillance without a warrant. Law enforcement usually uses their normal SWAT assault for officer safety.
Do you really think the secret FISA courts are due process?
I am aware law enforcement and security agencies have decryption tool, but they are not as efficient as decryption back doors.
 
Back
Top