

NSA: we can warrantlessly grab your data and keep it forever if encrypted - obstacle1
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130620/15390323549/nsa-has-convinced-fisa-court-that-if-your-data-is-encrypted-you-might-be-terrorist-so-itll-hang-onto-your-data.shtml

======
cabalamat
If the NSA is saying that all encrypted communication is automatically
suspicious, then everyone should use encryption for all data they send over
the internet.

Starting today, I am writing email encryption software that, when you send an
email to someone else with the software installed, will automatically encrypt
it on the way out, and automatically decrypt any encrypted messages on the way
in. (A "zero user interface" once installed).

The intention is that this will allow people to encrypt their messages with
zero effort on their part.

Initially it will encrypt email and will run on unixlike machines (Linux and
Mac). Later it will run on all major platforms (Windows, iOS, Android) and
have functionality for VoIP and social networking (the intention is to replace
Skype and Facebook with secure alternatives).

~~~
gfodor
If you really want this to work you should target the webmail use case for the
big three webmail providers. Nobody wants to use a standalone client on a PC,
if that's what you are suggesting. Next up is a mobile client for Android and
iOS that works identically to the existing mail client on those platform so
there is no learning curve.

In other words, this will be a long slog where most of the work is product-
oriented and feature Xerox'ing, and not whiz-bang cool encryption oriented.
Good luck :)

~~~
chacham15
Im unsure of what you are describing. Are you stating that hotmail should be
able to display your decrypted emails? That would imply that they themselves
would be able to read it and therefore remove any benefit. Any website you
would build would have the same problem unless you resort to js crypto in
which the js can be changed on you in a second (when the government forces
your company to do so) and send the private key to the nsa. How exactly are
you envisioning a solution?

~~~
ordinary
There is no need for that decryption to occur server-side.

~~~
sneak
Where will the keys be stored?

How will they be distributed and replaced?

Who will generate them?

How will they get on my phone?

What happens when my phone is stolen?

How will they get to the people who want to communicate with me?

~~~
gfodor
Ie, this is a hard design problem.

Hacking out a local client usable by unix nerds punts on these problems, more
or less. Solve these problems in a way that fits into the workflow of present
day average e-mail users (ie, my mom) and you will have something.

------
betterunix
When I encrypt, I have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Period. Stop
trying to violate that privacy, unless you are accusing me a specific crime
and you have probable cause.

~~~
jessriedel
I could be wrong, but I don't think any of the recent PRISM brouhaha hinges on
whether you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Everyone agrees that you
do. Telephone calls (made in non-public places) explicitly enjoy this
expectation.
[http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Reasonable_expectation_of_privac...](http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Reasonable_expectation_of_privacy)

Rather, the recent issue is a disagreement over what constitutes a violation
of privacy, e.g. whether electronic collection of data (without a human
listener) constitutes violation.

~~~
genwin
It would also be an obvious privacy violation for the NSA to install cameras
in our bedrooms, even if they promised to never watch the video without a
warrant.

~~~
mpyne
Yes, but that's because it would require access to your bedroom, not because
it's evil to capture data per se.

What if, instead, you _had_ a bedroom camera (maybe for tracking frisky
escapades) and it streamed wirelessly to a home server? The more relevant
question then becomes whether it's OK for the NSA (or rather, FBI) to sit on
the street and capture that WiFi stream from a public road.

As you consider this question, also consider how many open WiFi hotspots
you've ever used (or broke the WEP for) in your hacking career. :) The idea
that it's OK to hack the stupid because their system was so open to attack
might finally die due to PRISM, if people are intellectually honest with
themselves.

~~~
svachalek
I think there's a significant difference between using an open (or even poorly
secured, although I've never done that) hotspot in order to get onto the
internet, vs deliberately capturing personal data from that hotspot with the
intention to analyze it and possibly use it to harm the subjects of that data.

------
justanother
How generous of the NSA to admit to a DDOS attack surface. You may all
commence emailing each other PGP-encrypted copies of the complete Star Trek:
TNG (Blu-Ray, natch), now.

~~~
cleaver
That was my thought.

dd if=/dev/urandom of=secret.txt bs=1m count=200

^^^ this should do the trick!

~~~
IanChiles
An unbreakable code! Or we can send around 'encrypted' messages that are
completely devoid of meaning, but incredibly suspicious...

------
doki_pen
This is like getting a warrant to search your house because your blinds are
drawn.

~~~
grecy
Warrant? pfft, they just force their way in when they really want to
[http://www.storyleak.com/video-shows-home-searches-by-
boston...](http://www.storyleak.com/video-shows-home-searches-by-boston-
police-were-not-voluntary/)

~~~
LoganCale
Absolutely sickening.

------
gasull
If I lose all my data due to a hard drive crash, can I submit a FOIA request
to obtain a backup? :-)

~~~
sigmar
did you transmit your entire hard drive contents over the internet at some
point?

~~~
iamjustin
You could image the PC, then upload an encrypted copy to Google Drive, so that
the NSA can keep the copy forever for you.

~~~
sneak
Uhh, Google will do that anyway.

------
microb
All encryption is temporary encryption. "In other words, if your messages are
encrypted, the NSA is keeping them until they can decrypt them."

~~~
toddsiegel
That was exactly my first thought. They can hold until they have the computing
power to crack it.

------
donniezazen
As a user of an online backup solution that encrypts everything client side, I
am reluctant to use it anymore. Would knowing that encryption makes you more
vulnerable for illegal online search and seizure change your online behavior?

------
phogster
Guilty until proven innocent. Sounds reasonable.

~~~
alan_cx
Well, what have you got to hide........?

~~~
finkin1
Have you seriously missed the dozens of articles on HN recently explaining why
privacy is important even if you have nothing to hide? Or are you just
trolling?

~~~
obstacle1
I took it as sarcasm. One can hope...

~~~
jlgreco
It's alan_cx, so it is definitely sarcasm. He isn't foolish enough to believe
such a thing.

~~~
alan_cx
You are of course 100% correct, but I am a tad worried I now have some sort of
reputation. Eeeek.

~~~
jlgreco
This probably reflects more on me than it does you, I should spend less time
on here...

~~~
alan_cx
Fair enough!!!! :)

------
nodata
And it only takes one vulnerability once for them to get your passphrase.
Sleep well!

~~~
aspensmonster
Rotate your passwords. Regularly.

~~~
nodata
That won't help at all. One vulnerability once and it's game over.

~~~
aspensmonster
I should have also added that you keep software up to date. Any previously
exploited vulnerabilities (ideally) get patched over time. Of course, if
you've been pwned at ring 0 by a persistent and active attacker, you've got
more problems to worry about than automated exploitation of out-of-date
software.

~~~
nodata
So you get hit by a zero-day and then you are compromised. What then?

~~~
aspensmonster
Assuming it's not ring0 or something equivalent, they will have, at most,
whatever the time limit is between rotations. If you rotate every six months,
they could conceivably have six months of data. And if the zero day is still
not patched, they could have another six months, and another, and another.
There's no guarantee of not being compromised. It's just a matter of not
making it easy by using the same passwords and same software versions for
years at a time.

~~~
nodata
How would you handle disk encryption?

~~~
aspensmonster
If your disk encryption software gets exploited, then presumably it's a hop
skip and a jump to make your way into the kernel, rendering recovering from
tainted backups pointless. You'd have to start from scratch with new
encryption software that you trust hasn't been exploited.

There's always a chain of trust that you have to follow down. It just gets
harder to mess with the deeper you go. Not impossible, just more difficult and
less likely to be entirely automated.

------
ke7in
I'm curious to what options we have as citizens, short of organizing militias,
can really do here. I think the government play is just "wait til this blows
over" and they might get away with that.

~~~
LoganCale
Call—actually _call_ your members of Congress. It's a lot more effective than
sending an email. Urge others to call too. If they get enough calls to
understand a large number of people are actively angry about this, they might
actually do something.

[http://callday.org](http://callday.org)

Also encrypt everything possible, and encourage others to do that too. It
might attract more attention to you, but it's also a strong assertion of your
right to privacy. Everyone should use encryption for even the most mundane of
things. The government says we have no right to privacy for emails older then
180 days because we are sharing them via someone else's server. If we encrypt
them, that argument is invalid, because we are making it clear that only the
recipients are intended to read it and it is private from everyone else.

------
DoubleCluster
If your data isn't safe when someone has access to it "forever" then you
haven't encrypted it good enough. I'd still prefer them not to keep it though.

~~~
obstacle1
I think a big problem there is that "encrypted good enough" today might be
"completely breakable" in 20, 40, or X number of years.

------
lazyjones
So, tell me - did Google start encrypting so many services just to give the
NSA a better excuse for siphoning all data, including SSL encrypted
communication, E-Mails etc.?

~~~
zhemao
Google stores an unencrypted copy on their servers, so the NSA would just get
it from them. No need to store the encrypted copy for perpetuity.

~~~
lazyjones
Yes, but since the user encrypted it, he's suspicious and more likely to be
snooped on, right? So by enforcing encryption, Google helped get the NSA an
excuse to grab data (even the unencrypted copy) in more cases.

------
Raz0rblade
Well one thing they hate probaply is blowfish encryption. Dont use triple DES,
as they where involved in it forcing it as a standard.

------
fudged71
"Forever", meaning until they have the Quantum Computing technology to decrypt
such 'suspicious' files.

------
Fice
And even if they say they will not keep your data if not encrypted, how can
you know for sure?

------
exit
we should all dedicate a percentage of our bandwidth to spewing random numbers
at random listeners

providing endless cover to actual chatter

a crypto tithing

~~~
darkarmani
You mean create additional gmail accounts and fill them up with encrypted
"messages." How many gigs are free these days, 10GB?

~~~
sneak
I think it's still less than one utah datacenter divided by a billion or so.

------
ferdo
Guvf vf trggvat evqvphybhf.

------
admig
i don't believe this joke. ;)

