Active shooter at NAS Pensacola

[magnetfreezer]

I understand the argument but disagree with the premise. This is a matter of a duly elected government being able to exercise its legitimate police power. You shouldn't get to hide from a search warrant; that's the price we pay for living under a constitutional system and the rule of law. Just because I acknowledge that it's difficult for technology to distinguish between the CCP and a signed warrant from an American or European judge doesn't mean I think the latter should be a dead letter. If there's a warrant to search your devices from the legitimate government of a liberal democracy the so-called "promises" a company gave you shouldn't matter for a damn.

That's all pie in the sky, and I understand the reasons why in reality international companies are leery of China or Russia (or hey, Saudi Arabia) coming in and saying "but what about OUR warrants?" But dammit, it's way less than optimal, and this Saudi terrorist asshole is Exhibit "A."

The China argument isn't Chinese warrants, but Chinese hackers. Technologically, the claim is you can make a message/storage/etc. provably secure from anyone but the user that holds the key (for some definitions of provably). If there's a "backdoor", the offense vs defense track record of cyber indicates it's likely for it to be found and exploited by someone other than the intended corporate/govt team. Just depends where people want to put the needle between zero hack risk/zero Apple decryption capes and lawful warrant/some (maybe small) risk of catastrophic breach that affects all your iPhones.

 

[nittany03]

The China argument isn't Chinese warrants, but Chinese hackers. Technologically, the claim is you can make a message/storage/etc. provably secure from anyone but the user that holds the key (for some definitions of provably). If there's a "backdoor", the offense vs defense track record of cyber indicates it's likely for it to be found and exploited by someone other than the intended corporate/govt team. Just depends where people want to put the needle between zero hack risk/zero Apple decryption capes and lawful warrant/some (maybe small) risk of catastrophic breach that affects all your iPhones.

Hackers, warrants, potato, po-tah-to. Like the CCP gives a damn about the rule of law anyway; it's all the same. As for the rest, we're saying the same thing. Likelihood of abuse by bad actors is the problem, whoever they are.

 

[magnetfreezer]

Hackers, warrants, potato, po-tah-to. Like the CCP gives a damn about the rule of law anyway; it's all the same. As for the rest, we're saying the same thing. Likelihood of abuse by bad actors is the problem, whoever they are.

Not necessarily. Getting your SF-86 stolen from OPM is a lot easier than OPM releasing it in response to a CCP warrant.

 

[nittany03]

Not necessarily. Getting your SF-86 stolen from OPM is a lot easier than OPM releasing it in response to a CCP warrant.

I wasn't talking about OPM releasing an SF-86 to a foreign country, I was talking about a foreign country using the existence of a backdoor against its own citizens, without the due process protections we have here.

 

[Brett327]

Not necessarily. Getting your SF-86 stolen from OPM is a lot easier than OPM releasing it in response to a CCP warrant.

The results of your background investigation, including what your neighbors told the investigators and everything on your SF-86 are subject to FOIA.

 

[Ricosroughnecks7]

The results of your background investigation, including what your neighbors told the investigators and everything on your SF-86 are subject to FOIA.

I know you probably know this, but only if you are the person involved in the investigation. There are parts that are blacked out as well. Your neighbor cant FOIA your investigation because of the Privacy Act.

 

[Brett327]

I know you probably know this, but only if you are the person involved in the investigation. There are parts that are blacked out as well. Your neighbor cant FOIA your investigation because of the Privacy Act.

Fun story, my entire squadron's aircrew had to FOIA their own investigations to satisfy a USAF requirement to participate in a particular exercise.

 

[FinkUFreaky]

The results of your background investigation, including what your neighbors told the investigators and everything on your SF-86 are subject to FOIA.

I'm sure you're more than aware of his point; that mine for sure, likely his and likely your data got hacked by China several years ago. It wasn't through an FOIA request.

 

[Brett327]

Yes, but that’s not particularly relevant. All this fuss about people’s data. If a motivated actor wants it, they’re going to get it.

 

[FinkUFreaky]

Yes, but that’s not particularly relevant. All this fuss about people’s data. If a motivated actor wants it, they’re going to get it.

I'd imagine that if anyone is honest when they fill out their SF-86, there are one or two things they wouldn't want everyone else to know about them. So yes, data... It's kind of important. And yes, motivated actors will get it. Do we want to put it on a silver fucking platter for them?

 

[Mos]

I'm sure you're more than aware of his point; that mine for sure, likely his and likely your data got hacked by China several years ago. It wasn't through an FOIA request.

Reason #1 million why the govt should be given as little of our personal information or access to our electronic lives as possible. If the US govt had a good reputation of competently safeguarding our info and not abusing loopholes in due process, I might be in favor of giving them certain powers in extraordinary cases like this Saudi shooter. I don't think that's the case.

 

[SynixMan]

Unfortunately the nature of encryption is such that any “backdoor” built in a system inherently makes it insecure. You can’t make a key only the good guys get to use.

 

[bubblehead]

Unfortunately the nature of encryption is such that any “backdoor” built in a system inherently makes it insecure. You can’t make a key only the good guys get to use.

+1,000.

 

[GroundPounder]

On the subject of the shooter, about how many students from KSA run through our training every year? It would seem that the number would be low enough to do a good background on them all, and perhaps DX a few before they get here. I realize that the whole thing would be political, but maybe worth it in the long run.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

On the subject of the shooter, about how many students from KSA run through our training every year? It would seem that the number would be low enough to do a good background on them all, and perhaps DX a few before they get here. I realize that the whole thing would be political, but maybe worth it in the long run.

Or perhaps our “ally” KSA should be expected to screen the personnel they send here to make sure they aren’t affiliated with terrorist organizations or sharing their propaganda amongst themselves. If they’re too stupid or unwilling to do that, then why are we training them?