Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Constitutional Rights (Score 1) 242

That means if the FBI wants me decrypt any of my documents they can show my lawyer a search warrant otherwise they can FUCK OFF.

Even with a warrant, it has never been the case that a person could be compelled to translate the content of a document (a journal, for example) written in a private code. If you possess some form of codebook then they can force you to produce it with a subpoena, but that's pretty much as far as it goes.

A search warrant means they get to search your property, with or without your permission. You have no obligation to help them find what they're looking for, much less help them make sense of it once it's been found.

In any case this is less about individual warrants and more about preventing the manufacturers of popular electronics and software from making truly secure storage of personal data easy and ubiquitous. Encryption by default represents significant security benefits for the population at large, whereas its absence will have little or no impact on actual criminals beyond a bit of inconvenience. I can only conclude that the FBI is, perhaps unwittingly, taking the criminal's side on this issue—criminals stand to benefit more than anyone else from insecure systems.

Comment Re:Technology does not work that way. (Score 1) 242

The best possible permutation is where criminals are in total darkness, while the most incorruptible members of law enforcement, after obtaining a legitimate warrant, are in a brightly-lit room.

Even assuming you could find such a paragon of virtue to trust with everyone's secrets, which I highly doubt—and which is not your call to make—this has been tried. Many times. It simply does not work. If there is a back door into everyone's encrypted data, it will be available not only to these impractically idealized members of law enforcement for the objectively reasonable and impartial enforcement of universally agreed-upon laws, but also to criminals and others with less noble intentions. It's much the same problem as a large conspiracy: the more people that have access, the easier it for the back door to fall into the "wrong" hands; and a back door you can never use for reasons of security might as well not exist. It will get used, frequently, and it will leak, and when it does it will put everyone's private data in jeopardy. (Except for the real criminals, of course, who took care to speak in their own private code and/or encrypt all their data with an unbreakable and trivial-to-implement one-time pad—which won't be discovered until after the warrant has been issued to decrypt the files with the government's master key.)

Submission + - IRS doesn't tell 1 million taxpayers that illegal immigrants stole their SSNs (

schwit1 writes: The IRS has discovered more than 1 million Americans whose Social Security numbers were stolen by illegal immigrants, but officials never bothered to tell the taxpayers themselves, the agency’s inspector general said in a withering new report released Tuesday.

Investigators first alerted the IRS to the problem five years ago, but it’s still not fixed, the inspector general said, and a pilot program meant to test a solution was canceled, and fell woefully short anyway.

As a result most taxpayers don’t learn that their identities have been stolen and their Social Security files may be screwed up.

“Taxpayers identified as victims of employment-related identity theft are not notified,” the inspector general said.

And we should put the federal government in charge of healthcare?

Comment Re:FBI Word games (Score 1) 242

But I think it's important to admit that there is a real subject of debate here.

No. There isn't.

Problem is that encryption is more than just sending messages to your co-conspirators. There's banking. Paying bills. All that other good stuff that we do without thinking about the encryption. Back door on encryption means that that's all gone. Can't afford to do online banking with broken encryption. Can't afford a lot of the conveniences of modern living (haven't had to actually write a check in years. And don't expect to have to again)....

Comment Re:I hate Apple, but no (Score 1) 423

Well, it depends upon what the meaning of "is", is.

Intent is purely subjective and subject to the whims of whomever is currently interpreting the law. The letter of the law is much more concrete and harder to get around unless you want to actually redefine the meaning of words. The letter of the law is the guiding principle; if it was intent then you have kangaroo courts and decisions made based upon the current direction the wind is blowing.

Comment Re:I hate Apple, but no (Score 1) 423

So, to take that to the next level, does it mean that ANY differences in taxation levels must necessarily be the result of subsidies? In other words - if Germany taxes less than France, then Germany MUST be giving subsidies and therefore must force additional taxation? I mean, if lower tax rates are considered subsidies, then whoever has the highest tax is "right" and everyone else must be giving subsidies and should be penalized.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 423

Check out where we spend. Social insurance (Medicare/Medicaid, welfare, Social Security) costs and interest on the debt are 69% of all spending - which consumes 100% of Federal revenues. Everything else - defense, transportation, education, etc. - is paid for with borrowed money, and is just 31% of all spending. It's not defense spending - it's ALL spending, and you cannot solve it without cutting social insurance costs.

By the way, we've already passed $1.33 trillion in deficit spending this year, we'll probably hit $1.4 trillion. That's more than that 31% in total - meaning we're at the point where we can't even cover our social insurance and interest costs with tax revenues.

Comment Re:No news! (Score 1) 75

The political stuff is the worst. Every wingnut in your feed wants to spread their particular gospel. It's even worse than the blatantly religious stuff. The problem is probably what some people consider "news". Plus you've got idiots that start foaming at the mouth because they stumble onto something that feeds into their favorite narrative. It doesn't occur to them that it's an obvious satire site. It's sad, hilarious, and annoying all at once.

All memes are bullshit.

Someone may have a valid observation but they quickly run off the rails and jump the shark with extreme and absurd sh*t.

I could understand how a telepath might go nuts and would just want it all to shut off.

Slashdot Top Deals

Mommy, what happens to your files when you die?