Obama administration pushing for ‘back door’ into cellphones, devices, following Paris attacks


(Cyberwar.news) The Obama administration is pushing anew for measures that would require technology companies to provide federal spy and law enforcement agencies with a “back door” into encryption programming, citing the Paris terrorist attacks as proof that operatives can plan and coordinate such attacks undetected.

As reported by The Daily Beast, federal officials are also looking anew at ways to restrict the use of encryption technology after a period before the latest attacks in which the effort had lost momentum.

However, technology and intelligence experts say the argument is bogus, as they noted that the “ringleader” of the Paris attacks was a figure known to both French and American authorities before launching an attack that killed 130 people.

Thus far, The Daily Beast reported, officials have yet to put forth evidence that the Paris operatives used encryption. Rather, it seems that U.S. and French intelligence and domestic security agencies may have simply missed the plotting as the ISIS operatives moved back and forth easily across national borders and built suicide vests. The undetected movements highlight critical weaknesses in intelligence and security, both in the U.S. and France.

The Daily Beast reported further:

In recent days, U.S. officials have been taking the pulse of some technology companies to gauge their willingness to sit down for meetings aimed at coming up with new encryption policies, two individuals familiar with those discussions [said].

But the tech companies haven’t committed to any major changes and are digging in their heels for a long fight.

A top executive with a prominent encryption technology maker who did not want to be identified told the web site that he had not yet been contacted, which was surprising given that his company is crucial to the debate over encryption technology is commercially available and nearly impossible for intelligence services to break.

However, the executive asked whether the Obama administration had the will to wage what would be a drawn-out, public debate considering that, before the Paris attacks, federal officials had tried, and failed, to control encryption.

“They know how crazy it is for anyone to talk about backdoors,” he told The Daily Beast, in reference to a proposal offered by some U.S. officials in recent months that encryption technology should have some means for the government to dissect a message for intelligence purposes or for a criminal investigation.

But a number of tech experts have picked apart that notion, The Daily Beast said, because they believe it to be impractical and an easy way to give hackers the means to foil encryption – a major component of information security online as it is used to protect financial transactions and other sensitive data.

“People will continue to create ‘unbreakable encryption,’ and others will continue to find a way around it, including the intelligence community, of course,” Bob Stasio, a former employee of the National Security Agency and military cyber officer, told The Daily Beast.

“I am a full believer in ‘if man can make it, man can break it,’ so I think saying we should limit encryption technology to prevent malicious use is not only a waste of time, but weakens legitimate cyber security as a whole,” Stasio, who is now a fellow with the Truman National Security Project, added.

  • Have you ‘liked’ Cyberwar.news on Facebook? Click here!

See also:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/30/feds-want-backdoor-into-phones-while-terrorists-walk-through-front-door.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/046127_iPhones_back_doors_surveillance.html

value="Enter your email address here..." style=" border-radius: 2px; font: 14px/100% Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; padding: .2em 2em .2em;" onfocus="if(this.value == 'Enter your email address here...') { this.value = ''; }" onblur="if(this.value == '') { this.value = 'Enter your email address here...'; }" />

style="display: inline-block;

outline: none;

cursor: pointer;

text-align: center;

text-decoration: none;

font: 14px/100% Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;

padding: .2em 1em .3em;

text-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,.3);

-webkit-border-radius: .2em;

-moz-border-radius: .2em;

border-radius: .2em;

-webkit-box-shadow: 0 1px 2px rgba(0,0,0,.2);

-moz-box-shadow: 0 1px 2px rgba(0,0,0,.2);

box-shadow: 0 1px 2px rgba(0,0,0,.2);"

>



Comments
comments powered by Disqus

RECENT NEWS & ARTICLES