Obama and the Justice Dept. May Be Losing the P.R. Battle over Encryption, but Watch the Larger War
Nobody believes it's 'just one phone.'
Nobody believes it's 'just one phone.'
Legislators smuggled all kinds of questionable provisions into a last-minute, $1.1 trillion spending bill
Big names in tech file briefs in support.
Judiciary Committee members understand the precedent involved.
Federal officials can't keep their own secrets. Would you really trust them with the ability to access yours?
Says government has overstepped bounds
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 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.
Gov. Kasich's response on security highlights politicians' lack of interest in dangers of mandating 'back doors.'
Officials don't seem to care if you're more vulnerable to criminals if it helps their pet causes.
We can blame last summer's Office of Personnel Management hack on good, old-fashioned bureaucratic incompetence-not a lack of CISA-style "information sharing."
More bumbling around tech privacy issues
At the heart of the measure is expansion of the feds' ability to access data without a warrant.
Some might find this argument in favor of expanded surveillance a bit underwhelming.
More government snooping of Americans; less liability for big business.
CISA is alive and appears to have the White House's support.
Meanwhile a cybersecurity bill could put private customer data in the hands of DHS.
A new Showtime series sounds pretty alarmist about everything that makes the Internet great.
Inconveniently for the U.S. intelligence community, the Paris attacks had nothing to do with encrypted communications.
Here's why CIA Chief John Brennan is full of crap.
All your data belongs to the government.
Why did the U.N. feel justified in recommending such illiberal censorship policies while providing such shoddy evidence to back their claims?
CyberWar Threat and Crazy Ex-Girlfriend may make you paranoid for completely different reasons.
Apparently messing (even briefly) with a newspaper website is a federal matter.
OPM now says 5.6 million fingerprints stolen.
The real moral of the Ashley Madison hack? Our data is fundamentally insecure.
Somebody's making a desperate effort to try to maintain control of the situation.
Would the administration actually charge the candidate promising to extend Obama's policies?
The question for cybersecurity-minded lawmakers should not be how to control the zero-day market but how to encourage more "white hat" trades and fewer destructive ones.
Federal agency sees the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) as harmful, not helpful.
"Cyberweapons" crackdown could be used to criminalize basic software-bug testing.
The worm was designed to gather intelligence on the ongoing Iranian nuclear talks.
Encrypt everything - inhibits data breaches and government domestic spying.
Epic government fail, yet no one is responsible.
According to newly released Snowden docs, the spy agencies use security vulnerabilities to hack and track users.
Office Personnel Management data breach perhaps 18 million - 4X larger than reported, says CNN
By hacking the NSA computers. So says security analyst Bruce Schneier.
The War on Terror is providing plenty of rhetorical ammunition to anti-encryption officials, but they are dangerously wrong.
Are the feds still going to lecture us on how they should set the standard for cybersecurity?
How's that whole "trust us" thing working out?
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10