Comey Acknowledges Screwing Up in Encryption Fight, But He Still Doesn't Grasp the Issue
The former FBI director recognizes his criticism of Apple was "thoughtless," but he doesn't see the underlying problem with seeking cybersecurity back doors.
The former FBI director recognizes his criticism of Apple was "thoughtless," but he doesn't see the underlying problem with seeking cybersecurity back doors.
A political battle following the San Bernardino attack was the result of an attempt to make a test case.
Maybe Santa should just put everybody on the 'naughty' list and be done with it.
FBI refuses to publicly reveal security vulnerability.
Agency wants to avoid a review process over passing information back to Apple.
It wouldn't make a 'back door'-it would make a gigantic crater.
The two switch sides in the request for access, but the underlying issues are the same.
The Senate is still interested in legislation that could weaken everybody's security.
The FBI says a mysterious "outside party" has found a way to unlock San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook's iPhone without assistance from Apple.
In the 11th hour, feds ask to delay court hearing over access to terrorist's work phone.
Accusing Apple of "hyperbole" is pretty ballsy...and utterly wrongheaded.
Both sides will be back in court next week.
Nobody believes it's 'just one phone.'
Big names in tech file briefs in support.
Federal officials can't keep their own secrets. Would you really trust them with the ability to access yours?
Rubio, Cruz accept claim that the encryption fight is over "just one phone."
Company reveals formal opposition plan to demand they help weaken phone security.
The talking points insist this Apple case is an isolated incident. Evidence suggests otherwise.
The government wants what it wants, consequences be damned.
The stick has been suggested. Now where is the carrot?
This seemingly simple demand opens a massive can of extremely dangerous worms.
Consider Sen. Tom Cotton and Rep. Justin Amash and guess which is which.
Company will not compromise user security to help access terrorist's phone.
The Assault Weapons Ban of 2015 covers guns with lethal features like threaded barrels and folding stocks.
Did an Obama-administration policy prevent the feds from looking at Tashfeen Malik's social-media profiles? Yes and no.
Surveillance brought up in Republican debate.
SWAT team's heroic response to mass shooting leads to calls for more military gear for local cops.
A perfect storm of hysteria and anti-government sentiments will lead to...what, exactly?
Baffling contradictions about privacy or just old-fashioned blame-shifting?
The libertarian acting legend stands up for self-defense.
No-gun zones like the one in effect where the San Bernardino shooting took place are not only unconstitutional but also an invitation to disaster.
The explanation is far more political than religious.
Unlike Obama's gun control proposals, armed citizens can stop mass shooters who are invisible until they strike.
Over one-third of the 680,000 suspected terrorists have "no recognized terrorist group affiliation."
'See something, say something' vs. 'mind your own business'
You'd think our constitutional expert of a president would have a better grasp of 'due process.'
The category has no meaning except through legislation.
Tougher gun controls didn't help in California.
The president didn't lay out a new plan as much as remind us of what he's been doing for months already.
Words are words and bullets are bullets. You'd expect journalists to understand that.
Five ways to respond better.
A perfect storm for the policy agendas of gun grabbers and Muslim bashers, of right-wing and left-wing statists.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks