Exceptional Access - Revision history

Tom: /* References */

2019-11-13T02:02:18Z

‎References

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:33:35Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:24:04Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:19:14Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:16:25Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:13:15Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2019-04-19T00:08:40Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Solutions */

2019-04-18T23:01:31Z

‎Solutions

Tom: /* Solutions */

2019-04-18T23:00:08Z

‎Solutions

Tom: /* Solutions */

2019-04-18T22:59:28Z

‎Solutions

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:02, 13 November 2019
Line 23:		Line 23:
	[[Category:Glossary]]		[[Category:Glossary]]
	[[Category:Cryptography]]		[[Category:Cryptography]]
		+	[[Category:Mobile]]

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 *Soon after the NSA learned of the threat to their surveillance capability with computer cryptograph, they start to work on mitigations where the government held the keys in heavily protected escrow. This plan did not even consider the leakage of government "secrets" that has been a common part of reporting on government plans. But the threat posed with the AT&T Telephone Security Device 3600 in 1992 forced their hand and resulted in a hurried attempt to release the Skip-Jack encryption scheme based on the Clipper chip.
 *But Clipper failed in spectacular fashion as reported on the front page of the New York Times <ref>John Markoff, ''At AT&T, No Joy on Clipper Flaw.'' (1994-06-03) New York Times p. 1 https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/03/business/at-at-t-no-joy-on-clipper-flaw.html?searchResultPosition=1</ref><blockquote>When Dr. Blaze, a 32-year-old computer scientist at AT&T Bell Laboratories, discovered a basic flaw in the Government's cloak-and-dagger Clipper system recently, he was merely doing what he does best: pushing computer code until it breaks. But AT&T is poised to become a leading supplier of Clipper technology, which the Clinton Administration is promoting as a way to let law enforcement officials wiretap encoded telephone calls and computer transmissions in the digital age. And if Dr. Blaze's research undermines the Clipper, it could scuttle a multimillion dollar business.</blockquote>
-*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and there always seems to be yet one more agency that wants access to the secrets of its citizens with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself.</blockquote>
+*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and there always seems to be yet one more agency that wants access to the secrets of its citizens with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote in his 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself.</blockquote>
 ==Problems==

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 *Soon after the NSA learned of the threat to their surveillance capability with computer cryptograph, they start to work on mitigations where the government held the keys in heavily protected escrow. This plan did not even consider the leakage of government "secrets" that has been a common part of reporting on government plans. But the threat posed with the AT&T Telephone Security Device 3600 in 1992 forced their hand and resulted in a hurried attempt to release the Skip-Jack encryption scheme based on the Clipper chip.
 *But Clipper failed in spectacular fashion as reported on the front page of the New York Times <ref>John Markoff, ''At AT&T, No Joy on Clipper Flaw.'' (1994-06-03) New York Times p. 1 https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/03/business/at-at-t-no-joy-on-clipper-flaw.html?searchResultPosition=1</ref><blockquote>When Dr. Blaze, a 32-year-old computer scientist at AT&T Bell Laboratories, discovered a basic flaw in the Government's cloak-and-dagger Clipper system recently, he was merely doing what he does best: pushing computer code until it breaks. But AT&T is poised to become a leading supplier of Clipper technology, which the Clinton Administration is promoting as a way to let law enforcement officials wiretap encoded telephone calls and computer transmissions in the digital age. And if Dr. Blaze's research undermines the Clipper, it could scuttle a multimillion dollar business.</blockquote>
-*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and there always seems to be yet one more agency that wants access to the secrets of its citizens with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself..</blockquote>
+*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and there always seems to be yet one more agency that wants access to the secrets of its citizens with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself.</blockquote>
 ==Problems==

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 *Soon after the NSA learned of the threat to their surveillance capability with computer cryptograph, they start to work on mitigations where the government held the keys in heavily protected escrow. This plan did not even consider the leakage of government "secrets" that has been a common part of reporting on government plans. But the threat posed with the AT&T Telephone Security Device 3600 in 1992 forced their hand and resulted in a hurried attempt to release the Skip-Jack encryption scheme based on the Clipper chip.
 *But Clipper failed in spectacular fashion as reported on the front page of the New York Times <ref>John Markoff, ''At AT&T, No Joy on Clipper Flaw.'' (1994-06-03) New York Times p. 1 https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/03/business/at-at-t-no-joy-on-clipper-flaw.html?searchResultPosition=1</ref><blockquote>When Dr. Blaze, a 32-year-old computer scientist at AT&T Bell Laboratories, discovered a basic flaw in the Government's cloak-and-dagger Clipper system recently, he was merely doing what he does best: pushing computer code until it breaks. But AT&T is poised to become a leading supplier of Clipper technology, which the Clinton Administration is promoting as a way to let law enforcement officials wiretap encoded telephone calls and computer transmissions in the digital age. And if Dr. Blaze's research undermines the Clipper, it could scuttle a multimillion dollar business.</blockquote>
-*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and their is always one more agency that wants access to secrets with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself..</blockquote>
+*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and there always seems to be yet one more agency that wants access to the secrets of its citizens with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself..</blockquote>
 ==Problems==

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 *Soon after the NSA learned of the threat to their surveillance capability with computer cryptograph, they start to work on mitigations where the government held the keys in heavily protected escrow. This plan did not even consider the leakage of government "secrets" that has been a common part of reporting on government plans. But the threat posed with the AT&T Telephone Security Device 3600 in 1992 forced their hand and resulted in a hurried attempt to release the Skip-Jack encryption scheme based on the Clipper chip.
 *But Clipper failed in spectacular fashion as reported on the front page of the New York Times <ref>John Markoff, ''At AT&T, No Joy on Clipper Flaw.'' (1994-06-03) New York Times p. 1 https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/03/business/at-at-t-no-joy-on-clipper-flaw.html?searchResultPosition=1</ref><blockquote>When Dr. Blaze, a 32-year-old computer scientist at AT&T Bell Laboratories, discovered a basic flaw in the Government's cloak-and-dagger Clipper system recently, he was merely doing what he does best: pushing computer code until it breaks. But AT&T is poised to become a leading supplier of Clipper technology, which the Clinton Administration is promoting as a way to let law enforcement officials wiretap encoded telephone calls and computer transmissions in the digital age. And if Dr. Blaze's research undermines the Clipper, it could scuttle a multimillion dollar business.</blockquote>
-*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself..</blockquote>
+*The metastatic growth in government's desire for secrecy was describe in the New Yorker as something that needed to be kept in check, rather than enabled. But what is really scary is that all of this secrecy doesn't work well. Leaks continue unabated and their is always one more agency that wants access to secrets with insufficient concern for their security. <ref>Jeffrey Toobin, ''Barr review.'' (2019-04-15) The New Yorker p. 15-16 </ref><blockquote>Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the intellectual polymath who represented New York in the US Senate for 24 years, developed a well-founded skepticism toward government secrecy. Bureaucrats and others, Moynihan knew, could always conjure reasons to keep information under warps, and the ratchet of secrecy generally worked in only one direction. secrets begat more demands for secrecy, at ever greater peril to the public's right to know what was happening in its name. Secrecy, Moynihan wrote inhis 1998 book of that title, thus became a "a hidden, humongous, metastasizing mass within the government itself..</blockquote>
 ==Problems==

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 ==Solutions==
 *All governments make the case that they have the technology and security necessary to protect user's secrets. The fiasco with skip-jack blew the extreme version of that argument out of the water. Yet there are many cases where we have decided to give the government the discretion to decide when a "brake the glass" event has occurred and access needs to be granted. For example, [[FirstNet]] has been established as a response to the lack of communications among emergency responders at the 9-11 tragedy. The resultant network and coordination with local governments allows access to much of a user's medical history. Some [[Smart Phone]]s have lock-screen access to a user identity, automobile registration information typically request the primary driver to be registered, and other mechanisms allow the first responders to deal with medical access and contact information to give the assistance required.
-*Ray Ozzie, Ernie Brickell, Stefan Savage, and Robert Thibadeau have all been working on finding some technical solutions that do not exhibit any of the flaws from earlier systems. Ray Ozzie give control to corporations that provide the encryption to grant access on a phone by phone basis to a decryption key, that when activated would reveal the secrets and block the phone from further use so that online access would never be possible.<ref name="levy" /> It seems that the press of security concerns will force the technologists' hand sooner or later and some such solution will be forced on the industry.
+*Ray Ozzie, Ernie Brickell, Stefan Savage, and Robert Thibadeau have all been working on finding some technical solutions that do not exhibit any of the flaws from earlier systems. Ray Ozzie's solution gives control to corporations that provide the encryption to grant access on a phone by phone basis to a decryption key, that when activated would reveal the secrets and block the phone from further use so that online surveillance would never be possible.<ref name="levy" /> It seems that the press of security concerns will force the technologists' hand sooner or later and some such solution will be forced on the industry.
 ==References==