
Homeland Security: Crypto makes it harder for Feds to find “terrorist activity” - declan
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/04/21/remarks-secretary-homeland-security-jeh-johnson-rsa-conference-2015
======
pyre
Here's a few that they forgot to add to the list:

* The fact that all citizens aren't required to log all activity of any sort with the government so that government officials and scan the log files for patterns makes it harder for Feds to find "terrorist activity."

* The fact that some things require warrants makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

* The lack of an all-knowing, all-seeing eye makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

* Considering people as human beings rather than just numbers on a screen makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

* The fact that all locks aren't required to register a master key / combination with the government so that any government official can bypass any lock at any time for any reason makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

While we're at it:

* Government officials that break the laws and get little or no punishment reduces public confidence in the rule of law. This leads to citizens viewing the government as an antagonist which makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

* The government spending copious amounts of money on the War on Drugs rather than repurposing said money to finding terrorists makes it harder to find "terrorist activity."

~~~
iterationx
If everyone was in a cage there would be no terrorist activity.

------
Nadya
>In the name of homeland security, we can build more walls, erect more
screening devices, interrogate more people, and make everybody suspicious of
each other, but we should not do this at the cost of who we are as a nation of
people who cherish privacy and freedom to travel, celebrate our diversity, and
who are not afraid.

I feel the ending speaks more against it than for it. It's mentioned because
it is a fact. It is a fact that strong encryption helps those who wish to
communicate in secret for dubious purposes.

It's not a very pretty fact. Because it means if the average citizen does not
wish to be spied on or wishes to have a secure line of communication - so must
"the bad guys".

Unfortunately this isn't an easy problem to solve.

~~~
codeddesign
Sure it is. The NSA can stop mass monitoring of U.S. civilians. The reason for
the sudden growth in encryption is purely because of their blatant monitoring
of U.S. citizens as terrorist's.

~~~
Nadya
Your solution doesn't address the problem. The problem is not a rise in
encryption but the government not being able to read encrypted communications.

Unless you are suggesting that all encrypted communication should be assumed
to be terrorist communication - and the only reason this assumption is now
considered unsafe is because a rising popularity of using encryption due to
NSA surveillance? If that is your point, I hope you see the flaw in it.

~~~
bediger4000
_The problem is not a rise in encryption but the government not being able to
read encrypted communications._

How is this the problem? As far as anyone knows publicly, breaking encrypted
communications has resulted in zero terrorism arrests. Given that US citizens
are supposed to not be under general suspicion all the time, how is encrypted
communication a big deal? How is breaking that encryption the problem?

~~~
Nadya
I think you're ignoring the context of my statements.

Let's assume two things off the bat:

    
    
       a) The government is only surveilling people under reasonable suspicion. [1]
    
       b) Encryption is not a confirmation of illicit activities.
    

The problem:

    
    
       1) Government has reason to suspect Person A
    
       2) Government cannot see their communications due to encryption
    
       3) Government cannot investigate any further due to encryption
    

In the past they could monitor communications of a suspect and determine
whether or not the suspicions were true. This has prevented a number of crimes
- both drug related, mafia/gang/cartel related, and terrorist related. With
encryption methods becoming commonplace - the government can no longer do what
they have been doing and these once preventable crimes are becoming less
preventable. Encryption is now too powerful and secure.

This is not a problem in and of itself. It's a good thing for citizens too!
The problem is that crimes that were once preventable through surveillance are
becoming impossible to survey.

The solution is to not weaken encryption - but find other methods of
confirming suspicions on a suspect who is under reasonable suspicions of
illicit activity. [2]

[1] We know this to be false, but go along with me here

[2] Which is what is being asked for: "We need your help to find the
solution."

~~~
bediger4000
I reject your assumption (a) categorically. By now, we've seen enough leaked
material to believe that the NSA and FBI surveill everyone they can. The NSA
and FBI apparently believe that _everyone_ is under suspicion. I reject that
belief and your assumption.

~~~
Nadya
See the footnote cited as [1] in assumption `A`. This does not make the
argument itself false. It makes the implementation and practice flawed.

Due to improper practice, people no longer trust the government to draw its
own line in the sand and declare "We shall not cross this line!"

Rightfully so! But that still does not take away the reality of the situation:

Improved encryption methods means secure communications of which cannot be
intercepted or prevented by a government body with the goals of protecting its
citizens. This poses a danger to the citizens.

Now the citizens can accept that danger and keep their own communications
secure from a government they no longer trust to stay within the drawn lines -
or they find an alternative solution. Or they accept the fact that their
desire for personal privacy is worth more than their security and make that
sacrifice.

I'll save you the time of finding the quote.

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither
liberty nor security."

------
Beached
I don't see the problem here, there are other ways to hunt terrorists then
parsing everyone's emails and phone calls.

Regardless of what terrorist do, most still have to act outside of the
internet, and those who do terrorist activities solely on the internet are
already using encryption. Also, the government still has access to tap phone
calls and get copies of people's emails through the warrant process, the only
thing the private sector is doing is making it harder for people to break the
law, isnt this a good thing?

