Schneier on Security

Clive Robinson • November 14, 2024 11:01 AM

@ Bruce, ALL,

With regards,

“This is a really good security feature. But various police departments don’t like it”

The first sentence should have “for users” tacked on the end.

Because then it makes the “them v us” mentality of the “Good v bad” observer view point.

Yes this technical forward step is of considerable use to anyone in society who wants or has need of privacy. It’s something that was predicted and discussed as a future technology academically back in 2000 (I was party to the discussion at an academic event in Stockholm that end of summer on the morning the “tall ships” came into port).

The question is for something that is effectively “so obvious” why it took so long to appear in consumer products (I’ve been putting similar into certain high end commercial products since before 9/11).

But that also brings in the observer view point issue.

I’m sure that many here can see why such technology is actually of a significant benefit to society as it has a very strong use as a “safety measure” for those at risk from others. That’s mostly ordinary people who have the misfortune to have come to the attention of those with undesirable personality traits (or mental aberrations). It does not have to be as severe as “abuse defined by legislation”, it could be any form of harm.

The problem is the advance of technology is many many times that of society and it creates new harms as it creates new benefits.

However some people have highly polarised views and significant cognitive bias. A look up of the behaviour of the FBI and DoJ against Apple a few years back will tell many of the dangers of such people.

The fact that the politicians can not or will not accept their view point is not just wrong, but is impossible to actually do. But they still push it under various names and technical variations should warn people that “the desire for oppressive power over the majority” is a fantasy above all others in their deluded minds.

Whilst the NOBUS Backdoor idea has been fairly thoroughly debunked, the new idea is “AI on the user interface” that “phones home”.

Apple ran a trial to try and reduce CSAM storage and communication on users devices. However it quickly became clear that it could be used to find and report anything that appeared on a users device, even if they did not put it there (the joys of malware for blackmail as a variation of ransomware is still waiting to be more fully exploited).

The point that many miss is that the “Guard Labour” used to ensure compliance with legislation and regulation, have little or nothing to do with “justice” as most ordinary members of society would view it. All they care about is “performance figures” that are “obtained as inexpensively as possible”. Often this is enforced by a carrot and stick policy of bonuses and disciplinary measures.

When your next mortgage payment is dependent on getting “one more collar” etc, are you really going to care more about keeping a roof over your families head or that actual “justice is served”?

It’s why we should have way way more privacy technology in place as the societal good via reduction in harms is going to easily exceed the harms to society that politicians shout about for their own self interest and as a way to make Guard Labour less expensive and way more prone to injustice…