[sobinator]

I watched Comey's entire hearing today. The article here is accurate, but I think that it takes an strongly opinionated view of Comey's guarded and yet honest responses.

Comey knows that the solution to this problem won't be solved with legislation, which is why he isn't going to expend his energy trying to accomplish what the EFF suggests as a solution. One good thing to consider is that the EFF and the FBI both recognize that encryption can be an evil thing and that actions need to be taken to protect the citizens and the government that serves them.

With respect to the debate I'm seeing here in the comments, it seems like, to me, that there is a considerable amount of misunderstanding. What was discussed today wasn't the issue of mass surveillance, but of how or even IF these companies that offer secure communication services could aid in FBI investigations. That is both a technical and a non-technical issue. Comey calls it a non-technical issue simply because he thinks the solution ought to be left to the technical people at each company, and that in principle, regardless of encryption strength, these companies should offer a way to help the FBI in these exceptional instances. I think people here are seeing one or the other side and not realizing that Comey is aware of both.

[sillysaurus3]

One good thing to consider is that the EFF and the FBI both recognize that encryption can be an evil thing and that actions need to be taken to protect the citizens and the government that serves them.

It's not a useful classification. Encryption can be used for evil, just as everything else in the world can.

Comey calls it a non-technical issue simply because he thinks the solution ought to be left to the technical people at each company, and that in principle, regardless of encryption strength, these companies should offer a way to help the FBI in these exceptional instances.

There's a difference between leaving it to technical people to help, and forcing technical people to help. Legislation is the route to the latter.

There is no way for technical people to help against a good cryptosystem unless that cryptosystem has been subverted from the start. This is the new world we live in, and it's up to law enforcement to either recognize that fact, or weaken American encryption relative to the rest of the world, with predictable consequences.

EDIT: "The Horror of a 'Secure Golden Key'" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8428632

[NotSammyHagar]

Everything can be bad, even water can be bad. You need it to live, but then my America, sadly tortured people with it (waterboarding).

[aianus]

> these companies should offer a way to help the FBI in these exceptional instances

No. If it's at all possible for the technical staff to help the FBI when 'appropriate', then it will also be possible for them to snoop on you for any other inappropriate reason (jealous boyfriend stalking his girlfriend, corporate espionage for profit, etc.)

[jacquesm]

Everything can be an 'evil thing'. A hammer, encryption, a laptop and an email client can be 'evil things'. So if everything can be an 'evil thing' the conclusion should be there are no 'evil things' only evil activities perpetrated by (probably) evil people.

> I think people here are seeing one or the other side and not realizing that Comey is aware of both.

I don't think it is possible to see one or the other side, I think in this case there are no 'sides' to be on. The cat is out of the bag, it won't go back in and any time wasted on this subject is time that would be more productively spent elsewhere. Just like gunpowder and nuclear weapons can't be un-invented (and those are a lot more skewed towards being 'evil things' and yet even gunpowder has good uses (explosives used for road building) and we've seen some proposals for PNE's (not that that ever worked)).

If you want encryption to be an evil thing by extension math is an evil thing.