
The Text of Feinstein/Burr Encryption Backdoor Bill - zmanian
https://www.scribd.com/doc/307378123/Burr-Encryption-Bill-Discussion-Draft
======
venomsnake
Actually that is pretty sane and toothless. It does nothing about strong
codes, strong pass-phrases, oob exchanged keys and so on.

The design limitation clause is pretty strong.

If just enables removal of artificial security enhancements.

~~~
kup0
Zdziarski seems to think it is quite dangerous. Thoughts?
[http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=6046](http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=6046)

I see the limitation clause and so forth, but some of the language still seems
pretty broad and dangerous. In fact the way it is worded, it nearly
contradicts itself, calling for "design limitation" yet requiring things that
will inevitably require a design change. Which part of that contradiction
would be upheld in the event this becomes law?

