[einhverfr]

Where this is going is a clear showdown on a large number of levels. I wish I could be optimistic about this being resolved decisively for the good guys but I think most likely we are likely to see a codification of the same stalemate.

The NSA has created a large market for services like Silent Circle and this means that a larger number of wiretaps and the like are likely to "go dark" as a result of encryption. We need fully open source and federated versions of things like Silent Circle has and those will come about.

But this will lead to new battles about encryption and government access to encryption. As the people start realizing that everything is tapped by default, they will start protecting themselves.

Wiretaps were tolerated when we could trust in processes that would guarantee that they would not be abused. Now that we know that this trust has been broken there is no way to go back.

We will see two battles in the near future. The first will be a battle over the size and scope of the surveillance state. I fear the NSA will win that one hands down.

But the second is over government access to encryption backdoors. We have more reason to be optimistic here.

Things are shaping up to create a huge showdown. I, for one, am relatively afraid of the consequences even if we win the second battle.

[hobs]

Yeah, I think many of the same things.

How are we supposed to challenge a secret program that even the overseers say they are overreaching, and yet wont acknowledge it exists, or that anyone has any right to sue because they cant prove the secret program targeted them.

Its a complete farce as far as I can tell, and the dog and pony show will eventually calm and then we will basically be in the same position as we ever were.

I will definitely be voting against those that support this buffoonery, but I don't know that most will.

[einhverfr]

What's worse, the NSA can pass on what the DEA will claim are anonymous tips that lead to evidence that lead to searches, etc. We become a society of "find me the man and I'll show you the crime" but with a stronger illusion to the rule of law than Stalin was able to muster.

[LoganCale]

They are already doing this. The NSA gives the DEA information, which the DEA then hides from everyone, including judges, and uses it to build a parallel case against the people the NSA spied on.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intel...

[einhverfr]

Just for the record, I chose that example because I was aware of the fact it was happening.

The scary thing though is that this means that people the NSA doesn't like can find themselves at the center of whatever scrutiny they think is most appropriate.

[jivatmanx]

>Wiretaps were tolerated when we could trust in processes that would guarantee that they would not be abused.

They were abused for a long time and we did nothing. The difference was you had to physically tap the line while the call was taking place, and then physically listen to the entire call.This placed enormous limitations. Now you can automatically store everyone's calls (translated to text), and search the entire database with a keyword search.

But this is one of those things that, sadly, few people outside of places like HN have the slightest understanding of.

[einhverfr]

I stand by my initial wording though. Wiretaps were tolerated because they required a court order and we could trust in a process that seemed to work.

But what has happened since is that particularized search warrants have been replaced by 1772-style general warrants. People now know that this trust has been broken on a tremendous scale and we can't go back. That's the difference.

In other words the key change is in perception more than in substance.