How do we disable terrorists and criminals from using encrypted forms of communication to plan their next attack? Should encryption be illegal? Should hardware level keyloggers be made mandatory?
What do you think, Sup Forums? I'm getting tired of hearing about these mass murders that could have been prevented.
Other urls found in this thread:
gr8 b8 m8
someone will bite
>What do you think
me think ya move it to Sup Forums
> I'm not smart enough to form my own opinion
>implying existing backdoors data harvestest have actually prevented any of the recent happenings
These mass murders have yet to actually use encryption though.
Hell no to both of these.
all they need is the metadata.
>implying you can sort out and pinpoint specific and legitimate often coded threats from the data of hundreds of millions of people
It's better stop supporting double-standards in the Middle East by supporting state-sponsors of terrorism like the KSA and Qatar and stop toppling governments.
as if even if you could they would do anything about it
>implying previous paris bombing
happenings are good for the powers that be to enforce more control and limitations
>How do we prevent terrorists and criminals from communicating face to face to plan their next attack? Should face to face conversations be illegal? Should wiretaps be made mandatory?
>What do you think, Sup Forums? I'm getting tired of hearing about these mass murders that could have been prevented.
Trucks should be illegal.
Strong identity protection provides much better cover for undercover operatives infiltrating target groups.
HUMINT reliably provides much better results with counter-terrorism operations; SIGINT just gives you a really big haystack to embarrass you after the fact. In truth, individuals are usually known about in advance but resource limitations means they cannot be effectively targeted in a manner which would really prevent an attack.
The most threatening groups are resistant to both, their OPSEC including familial ties near-impossible to effectively infiltrate, and communication in person which makes remote COMSEC totally moot. Operational use of encrypted messengers by terrorist groups - as opposed to public relations/propaganda use - is non-existent, and use for propaganda/PSYOPS is public by design and would not meaningfully benefit.
So it's not all doom and gloom for law enforcement/counter-terrorist organisations. Operationally they know this, they just find mass surveillance more convenient.
Realistically the only response to the attack on the internet and freedom of expression, assembly and thought that is mass surveillance is mass encryption in a manner that protects identity metadata. That's what I'm working on, and though it undoubtedly has negative effects too, I have no regrets about it. It is simply cause and effect. I am aware some others disagree, but if they had been responsible with what they do and seek, there would have been no need for such effective measures. Sadly, they are not.
Also I'm not a communications service provider, so Theresa May's Snooper's Charter can go fuck itself.
Mother fucking this. Wake up, people.
>How do we disable terrorists and criminals from using encrypted forms of communication to plan their next attack?
Just because you don't understand them talking doesn't mean they encrypted it.
You know what?
I'm tired of people like you.
It's people like you who are the greater threat. But fortunately you're just a moron posting on the internet who has no principles with little or no ways to be taken seriously - i sincerely hope it stays that way. But i'm afraid there are more like you - people far more persuasive than you - who also are completely oblivious to the implications following their ideas, if they were somehow made reality.
If people like you were in charge, we would have it easier to just welcome our ISIS overlords or whatever. Life wouldn't be too different compared to a world that undergoes what you're suggesting. We'd get to that level eventually anyways since there would always be more room for twisting morality to justify more bills to ban or severely regulate our personal freedoms,
...
BAN ENCRYPTION
>terrorist use encyption
No they just use the in game chat of the most popular mmo at the time. No one suspects about buying weapons and doing a raid within that context.
Ccalled the cops, called the state police, called the county sheriff, called your ISP, called the District Attorney, called Interpol, called the NYPD, called the State Attorney, called the LAPD, called Child Protective Services called the FBI, called US Homeland Security, called the CIA, called the NSA, called the US Marshals, called the local courthouse, called your State Constable, called London Metropolitan Police, called the German Police, called the TSA, called the US President, called the attorney general, called the National Guard, called the US marines, called the US Navy, called the US Air Force, called the US army, called the Royal Navy, called the governor of every state, called the Federal Air Marshals, called every sheriff deputy, called the Coast Guard, called the US Customs and Border Protection, called the RCMP, called every park ranger, called the mayor of every city in France, called the British Army, called the Queen, called NATO, called the Russian Air Force, called the Federal flight deck officers, called the UN, called the Corrections Department for every state, called the Australian Federal Police, called SWAT, called the Supreme Court, called the Mexican Police, called the White House, called the DEA, called the inspector general, called the Secret Service, called CNN, called ABC, called the vice president, called the senators for every state, called congress, called the pope, called CHP, called the Department of Fish and Wildlife for every state, called the internet police, called the US Capitol Police, and called the Party Van.
Enjoy your V&
I just texted japmoot and he told them all to stand down
...
Its the same argument as taking away guns OP, criminals are still going to break the law and find ways around it leaving law abiding citizens vulnerable to attack.
test
If we killed everybody, there would be no more people for these people to terrorize, AND there would be no more people to terrorize the people.
Yes citizen, you must surrender everything to the Government for your own safety.
YOU HAVE BEEN VISITED BY THE ISLAMIC TRUCK OF TOLERANCE
______________¶___
|religion of peace ||l “”|””\__,_
|______________|||__|__|__|]
(@)@)*********(@)(@)**(@)
POST THIS IN ANOTHER THREAD OR YOUR COUNTRY WILL GET TRUCK'D
>I'm getting tired of hearing about these mass murders that could have been prevented.
You did hear about the recent Nice Attack right? I wouldn't even consider it as a 'terror attack' -- it was basically some creepy loner guy that wanted to kill other instead of being an hero, the goy most likely browses 4chin like us, how can you prevent yourself sempai.
>some guy literally named muhamad
>not terrorism
lmao
>guy was divorced
>had 3 kids but molested them
>loner, no friends and even neighbors doesn't know him
Yeah, he's pretty much the incarnate of Sup Forums
We should make encryption illegal without a license.
islam is a religion of KABOOM
Encryption doesn't kill people.
>these mass murders that could have been prevented.
How could have they been prevented? Suppose for the sake of argument I have proof of your planning to blow up a building you have all the explosives and shit you need.
I happen to be of the opinion that up until the moment you actually blow up a building, you're not guilty of a god damn thing, in burgerland they'd arrest you for conspiracy to blow up a building, but you didn't, at no time you actually did anything, so you literally get arrested for thinking things up in your head and writing them down.
So I suppose as a society we have two options, we can live in a democratic free society where one has privacy to think in their own heads or on paper.
Or you can live in a police state, which by its very nature, is not democratic, where you get arrested and thrown in prison for thinking and planning out scenarios you never actually do.
Considering that the latter example, doesn't produce results, NSA has to be for all purposes buried in a proverbial hay stack of information perhaps would be wiser to follow a different approach, maybe communication harvesting and looking for signals is a inefficient way of doing business. I don't know what the answer is, but the truth is if the botnet we all fear was so effective, they would be able to stop things from happening even if the communications were encrypted, and they can't.
Ban encryption
How do we prevent tests from getting guns?
BAN ALL SHARP OBJECTS
Terrorists*
>should encryption be illegal
No
>keyloggers
No, they should be illegal
This. Even with all the backdoors and monitoring, terrorism prevention hasn't been any more successful.
Seeking terrorists is like looking for needles in a haystack, and monitoring even more people through keyloggers/backdoors (looking at you, windows 10) just makes a bigger pile of hay in the stack. It's pointless.
>and even neighbors doesn't know him
This is most of the Swedes, senpai. And I dont mean the "Swedes" with that.
This is stupid. If all your adversary needs to defeat you is communication then you have already lost.
The real answer is effective surveillance, not access to everyone's risque tweets and texts.
muhamad ki11 people
>Don't take my guns all the babies have to die muh dangerous freedoms n shite
>HOW MANY CHIRRIN HAVE TO DIE BEFORE YOU DECRYPT YOUR HARD DRIVE YOU FUCKING TERRORIST IF YOU AREN'T HIDING ANYTHING YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR
I believe you
Right now there aren't enough people reading and acting on all the data that is already being collected. Even the plain text.
Things are happening right under our noses because we don't have enough eyes on it, we don't even have the capacity to act on all the leads that we do have eyes on.
do they even use encrypted forms of communication?
>In a study by Gabriel Weimann from the University of Haifa, Weimann found that nearly 90% of organized terrorism on the internet takes place via social media. According to Weimann, terror groups use social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and internet forums to spread their messages, recruit members and gather intelligence.
They are using these tools as long as they are not captured or detected. If they get cornered there they will move. Potentially to an encrypted space.
>as long as they are not captured or detected
There is so much shitposting going around the net, it's practically impossible to detect and stop every single terrorist using those sites.
And encryption works against their efforts to recruit people. They need to keep using open networks if they want to reach out to potential new members.