richardburr
Latest
Anti-encryption bill changes would limit some effects on security
A Senate bill that would demand encryption backdoors may be on ice for now, but it's now poised to come back -- with a few limitations. Just Security claims to have obtained proposed changes to the bill that would scale back its requirements to placate critics of its effect on privacy and security. Some of them could make a meaningful difference, but there's a concern that this wouldn't change the underlying problems with the legislation.
Senate anti-encryption bill is effectively dead, for now
If you were worried that a possible Senate bill requiring encryption backdoors would get enough support to become law, you can relax... for a while, at least. Reuters' government tipsters claim that the proposal, drafted by Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein, has lost most of its support. It won't be introduced this year, the insiders say, and would have no real chance even if it did go up for a vote. The White House's reluctance to back the bill (in public, anyway) is the main factor, but even the CIA and NSA were "ambivalent" knowing that it could hurt their own encryption.
Read the full Senate bill requiring encryption backdoors
If you were skeptical that polticians would be so audacious as to propose a law effectively requiring encryption backdoors... well, you just got proof. The Senate has released a finished version of Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein's Compliance with Court Orders Act, which demands that companies either produce data in a readable format when asked or else offer whatever help they can to make that data accessible. Despite the early uproar, little has changed between the draft and the finished bill -- the only big difference is that it explains which crimes can invoke the requirement. >Burr-Feinstein Encryption Bill by The Daily Dot
Senators work on what might be the most anti-encryption bill yet
The White House might have avoided serious backlash by refusing to back an encryption bill being worked on by the offices of Senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein. Kevin Bankston, director of New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, told Wired that in his 20 years working in tech policy, "this is easily the most ludicrous, dangerous, technically illiterate proposal" he's ever seen. Wired even notes that privacy experts thinks it's so bad, it's good, because it's very unlikely that the bill will become law as it is.
Reuters: White House refuses to openly back encryption law
The White House is apparently refusing to publicly back a law that would force tech companies to comply with decryption requests. Reuters has spoken to anonymous sources inside the administration that claim there are deep divisions on the issue of violating individual privacy. The new bill has been pushed by senators Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein in the wake of the San Bernardino iPhone case. The legislation is designed to give judges the power to compel firms like Apple and WhatsApp to comply with requests to decrypt secure software.
