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 :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Infophilegoing too far, making it all pointless. With GamerGate, if the goal is ethics in journalism, then harassment of women (and SJWs in general) is a completely different axis. No reason it would have to come up again after a disassociation and rebranding.06/30/2015 - 5:24pm
InfophileThough it is a comparison worth considering. The question is: Is it worthwhile to disassociate? The bad elements of feminism are typically bad because they're overzealous or go to far. Even if some did disassociate and rebrand, new people would start...06/30/2015 - 5:23pm
Goth_SkunkAnd just to be clear, that remark is firmly tongue-in-cheek, while also echoing statements made by those critical of GamerGate.06/30/2015 - 4:43pm
Goth_SkunkA fair point Andrew, and you are a very reasonable feminist. Though I would suggest that if you don't wish to be associated with the toxic elements present in feminism, I recommend disassociating yourself from them. Maybe call yourself something else? :^)06/30/2015 - 4:42pm
Andrew EisenGoth - By the by, you know how GamerGate doesn't like being painted with a broad brush? Well, I hate to speak for anyone but myself but I'm pretty confident in saying we feminists don't care for it much either.06/30/2015 - 4:10pm
Andrew EisenWell of course. Being a feminist doesn't mean rape can never be depicted in fiction.06/30/2015 - 4:03pm
InfophileIn fiction, it depends on the context. It's very easy to get "wrong," but there are cases where feminists have approved of how it's been shown (eg. the scene with Honor Harrington in the new compilation comic)06/30/2015 - 4:02pm
Andrew EisenThat would be an interesting alternate film though. Ray became a Ghostbuster to get rid of the spooks that had been sexually assaulting him.06/30/2015 - 4:00pm
Andrew EisenHe's not powerless against ghosts. That's very firmly established by that point in the movie.06/30/2015 - 3:57pm
Andrew EisenSo, if in the new movie, McCarthy or one of the other Ghostbusters has a dream where a pretty ghost goes down on her, I don't predict outrage (other than from those silly random no-name numbnuts on Twitter).06/30/2015 - 3:56pm
Goth_SkunkDream or not, it's still a scene that depicts a victim powerless to stop his attacker from engaging in an act of sex upon him. Even if he enjoys himself, it's technically rape. Hypothetically, he could feel traumatized afterwards.06/30/2015 - 3:55pm
Andrew EisenWell, he could always, you know, grab a proton pack and bust that rapey ghost! But again, it's still pretty clearly a dream.06/30/2015 - 3:53pm
ZippyDSMleeSo what dose GG stand for if its not been taken over my bigots??06/30/2015 - 3:52pm
Goth_SkunkI am assuming he's powerless to stop it, yes. I have no reason to believe a ghost would find itself in any way obligated to obey laws of corporeal beings. And it's not just about consent, but also about the means to stop the person engaging the sex.06/30/2015 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenRape in real life? Absolutely (though "tizzy" isn't the right word). In fiction? Depends on how it's used.06/30/2015 - 3:50pm
Infophile"...it's rape. And that tends to send feminists into a tizzy." You say that as if rape isn't something to get into a tizzy about.06/30/2015 - 3:48pm
Andrew EisenBesides, it's pretty clearly a dream. Ray and the ghost are in some unknown bedroom. Then it cuts to Ray and the other guys in the firehouse beds with Ray rolling over in his sleep and falling off the bed. Looks like Egon is having a weird dream too.06/30/2015 - 3:46pm
Andrew EisenYou're assuming he's powerless to stop it. Maybe saying "no" or something would have stopped the ghost. Anyway, so, in your opinion, sex (oral or otherwise) is rape unless there's explicit consent?06/30/2015 - 3:44pm
Goth_SkunkBut, to be completely fair, that fact never dawned on me until 15 minutes ago.06/30/2015 - 3:43pm
Goth_SkunkAbsolutely. He doesn't consent, and is powerless to stop it because his attacker isn't corporeal. The fact that he's enjoying himself does not change the fact that it's technically rape.06/30/2015 - 3:42pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician