Technology companies could face civil penalties for refusing to comply with court orders to help investigators access encrypted data under draft legislation nearing completion in the U.S. Senate, sources familiar with continuing discussions told Reuters on Wednesday. The long-awaited legislation from Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein, the top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, may be introduced as soon as next week, one of the sources said.
Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein are idiots. This quote from senator Lindsey Graham, South Carolina, who used to be on the side of the FBI but now supports Apple, is really telling:
“I was all with you until I actually started getting briefed by the people in the Intel Community,” Graham told Attorney General Loretta Lynch during an oversight hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I will say that I’m a person that’s been moved by the arguments about the precedent we set and the damage we might be doing to our own national security.”
All Graham needed was to talk to actual experts, and for him to be open about considering their arguments. If only all of them were so willing to listen to reason instead of pander to the cerebellar fears of the masses.
Lindsey actual dismiss from middle ground is a great loss.
“So this encryption issue, if you require Apple to unlock that phone that doesn^aEURTMt deny terrorist the ability to communicate privately does it, there are others ways they can do this,^aEUR Graham noted.
Yes, simply a pre-digestor [pocket calc size] and a post-digestor on the other side. That would leave Intelligence and Law-Enforcement with nothing but the Meta-data. This apply only to SMS.
But then they would be using military grade little gadgets. And so, other legal frame would apply. Those tinny ‘willis’ I would define ‘weapons’, actually.
Senators in the end -is my worry- are not to going to go against previous secret agreements with Military Wing.
The ‘conversation’ is needed. If truly wishing for Law-Enforcement no to stay out in the Storm.
Digital World axis has already tilted.
Status Quo Parts at Stake seems to be at denial. They should be in Damage Control mode [As many smaller ones (like FBI) already are].
Even if offered discrete full access.
A Civilian State of Law would be drastically reduced, in all aspects.
I remember when the CIA searched Feinstein’s Intelligence Committee computers. She launched on an epic rant, in sum: HOW DARE THE CIA VIOLATE MY PRIVACY?!? And the hypocrisy of it can also only be called — well — EPIC. She also bitch-slapped the CIA for daring to violate Angela Merkel’s privacy. Apparently, it’s okay for the government to spy on the rest of us, but how dare they spy on little Miss Diane Feinstein—?!? — oh gasp, the government?!?
What a little hypocrite; and a dolt. Put “Intellence” on a “lollipop” and she’d suck it dry. Not to get all misogynistic. Richard Burr would suck and swallow too. They’re both dolts.
Even the former director of the NSA, for GOD’s sake, thinks this is a doltish idea. Why oh why do we get such dolts (honestly can’t think of a better word right now) in congress. Never mind…
Edited 2016-03-19 23:29 UTC
Yea, maybe I’m there too. But quite sure that a Nation overseen by Intelligence [and I’m totally pro-Intelligence] will ‘dry’ to no avail.
This has always been typical of Feinstein. She’s the epitome of the career politician, right down to the “do what you want to them but don’t touch me” mentality they all share. I have a hard time figuring out who’s worse however, her or the idiots who continue to elect her term after term.
On a lot of other news items, we learn how a large number of politicians are bought by corporations (see Disney and such). If that is true, then such a law would pass? Who has bigger influence on politicians, lobbyists or agencies?
There is this week at Techdirt a very insightful paragraph contribution trying to explain the lack of sense on reserving rights on cultural products.
Privatized products should be by definition, acultural.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160320/11320133963/funniest-most…
“We cannot modify, enrich, build upon nor share these faux cultural artifacts.”
Only action we can do is parodying them.
No more are we allowed to think, much less to write down our own ‘Odyssey’.
That new comic characters are fluffy ‘cubes’, ‘eggs’ and random drawings. Why risk on even more stupid demands?
From XVIII century, going forward. Don’t even spend a cent of your resources trying to find if something of a later epoch is, or could be, or is going to be, conveniently copyrighted.
To me, the messenger is even more telling than the message. This is the same person who went on a rant against Assange and Snowden. That he, of all people, would switch sides tells me far more than the words he uses to do it.
1
Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Synapse)
1
Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Synapse)