Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: White House wants public’s input during ‘critical conversation’ on encryption

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin

    White House wants public’s input during ‘critical conversation’ on encryption

    After an online petition urging the Obama administration to endorse strong encryption managed to garner more than 100,000 signatures, the White House said this week that it wants Americans to be involved in a “critical conversation” that has already widened a rift between Washington and Silicon Valley in recent months.

    Deputy Chief Technology Officer Ed Felten and Michael Daniel, a cybersecurity coordinator for President Obama, said on Tuesday that the administration wants to hear the public’s input as the White House wrestles with whether or not legislative action should be taken to address increasingly ubiquitous and hard-to-break encryption.

    Official White House, National Security Council Response to Publicly affirm your support for strong encryption.
    This response was published on December 8, 2015.
    We want to hear from you on encryption:

    Share Your Thoughts on Strong Encryption

    I sent: I use and support strong encryption. Private communications is the heart and soul of the First Amendment. Security in ones papers and effects is the very text of the Fourth Amendment. /S/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Fairfax Co., VA
    No harm in making one's thoughts known.

    However, never forget the audience.

    These are the same kind of people who vilified Ed Snowden for revealing their game to Americans.

    And, before Ed Snowden was James Bamford whose book Shadow Factories 2008 explained how the No Such Agency basically monitored all electronic communications. His reports on how the government used an optical device to split the beam of fiber optic cables without loss or noticeable reduction of signal is chilling.

    So, these people who claim to want to hear Americans on encryption have had tons and tons of chances to stop pulling their stunts before now. Their real intent is already manifest.

    Even the latest revision to the law about collecting meta-data on phone calls is misleading. The government offers to stop collecting, but requires telecoms to retain the data for five years and requires the telecoms to turn it over without a warrant when requested. Total subversion of the warrant process. Not even a FISA court warrant. But, it sounds heartening on the surface because the government will (so it says) stop collecting. And, we know how fast the telecoms turned over subscriber data several years ago secretly. And, how, even though illegal at the time, Congress passed an unconstitutional ex post facto law making what the telecoms did retro-actively legal and thereby destroying the ability of anybody to sue.

    These types of people have told us over and over again their real intentions. It takes no genius to estimate the sincerity of their request to involve Americans in a discussion on encryption. Oh, they may want to involve Americans in a discussion on encryption, but whatever their real motive, it ain't gonna be good for Americans.
    Last edited by Citizen; 12-09-2015 at 07:00 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts