A former Navy lieutenant, not only did he steal classified material, he also stole hacking tools.
His attorneys are blaming hoarding.
Maybe former navy lieutenants ought to be banned from re-entering the USA for 90 days until they can be revetted. National security comes first. Ahead of liberty.
So remember last year when the US Government was suing Apple to get them to break into an encrypted iPhone, and the law enforcement and intelligence communities were going nuts and insisting that tech companies be forced to provide secret “master keys” so they could get around the encryption? This is why that is a terrible idea.
If this guy had had access to master keys that could break encryption then every bank account in the US that could be accessed online would now be at risk. Criminals and foreign governments would now have the ability to break into gmail accounts and steal identities and spy on suspected dissidents. Your credit card number could be stolen if you used it online at all. Foreign hackers would find it even easier to perform attacks like those on the DNC, or could break into American corporation’s internal network and steal insider information or trade secrets.
The economic and national security consequences of this would be devastating. And this is why strong encryption is so important, and why any attempt to weaken it must be stopped.
jtur88 Enough. Do not drop political jabs into unrelated threads.
No warning issued.
I don’t think you’re remembering the situation correctly at all. The government didn’t demand “master keys” to break encryption. The government sought to compel Apple to install a tampered-with operating system on an iPhone, and in the process Apple would have to digitally sign the OS. No “master key to encryption” would have left Apple’s hands at all, at any point.
But don’t let that get in the way of a good rant.
The “tampered-with operating system” is a master key, disabling the features (password entry via manual keypad only, imposed increasing delay between attempts, wipe after too many wrong guesses) which prevent trivial brute-force cracking of the password.
I await your reply, curious as to whether or not you continue to live by this maxim.
In that particular case, yes, that is what they were asking for. But as a result of it there were a lot of calls for master keys to be created for future products to prevent the situation from coming up in the first place.
That doesn’t make any sense. Without Apple’s keys, the government – even if it has in its possession an iPhone with the tampered OS – is severely, severely restricted on what it could do with such software.
I have no clue what you mean, but I assume it is an attempt at some type of insult.
I’m simply trying to set the record straight, because your first post could clearly be read that the FBI sought some kind of master keys from Apple that could then be used for all those other things. I guess we now agree that these were two separate incidents: first, whether or not Apple could be compelled to crack one iPhone in a certain manner, and second, whether various congressmen and senators’ idea to require a backdoor be built into encrypted products was a dumb idea.
I personally have zero problem with a court being able to compel Apple to crack one iPhone under the circumstances that were presented. I think requiring a backdoor into encryption products is a silly and bad proposal that would never, ever work.
The statement that the government is “severely, severely restricted on what it could do with such software” is a nitpick – the government would not need to do anything besides the initial password crack with the tampered software (once that’s done, they have access to everything). It’s technically true in the same sense that Bush the Smarter’s “no new taxes” promise was technically kept (he didn’t approve any new taxes, just increases in the old ones).
As noted above, it’s a distinction without a difference, as doing the former would enable the latter as a trivial extension. This is the point of objection raised by Tim Cook, whose judgment on the matter I will regard as somewhat more reliable than yours.
Just to clarify the OP, the guy was arrested about five months ago and has been detained without bail ever since. The linked article describes the next step in the process, an indictment by a grand jury.
Oh, so you agree that I’m correct, but you are complaining that I should be MORE correct! Well, that’s a new one!
Yeah, you trust the judgment of a billionaire looking out for his own company. If a oil tycoon says things in his own financial self-interest, he’s awful; but if a tech guy does it, he’s a social justice warrior. Got it.
Fucking Brilliant! Worth every penny of $1000/hr!
I can understand that the trial might take some time, but the indictment? Is this some special case where the usual “any competent DA can get an indictment against a ham sandwich” doesn’t apply?
Correction…he’s not being charged with espionage. There’s no evidence he passed the information to anyone else.
The second article agrees with the notion that he’s not a spy.
A strange case, but hording data is not an unknown phenomenon. Further, if this guy did it for long, undetected, what are the odd that there are a lot more like him out there?