FBI Surveillance Software to be Part of Windows XP Updates (fwd)

[Graham Lally]

Michael Motyka wrote:

> But a couple of questions :
> 
> Do you doubt that many in law enforcement think that universally
> backdoored systems would be right and good for society?


Only if they first define the terms for "society" - once the definition 
of such has been twisted to a desirable position (apparently one of a 
superior, over-riding patriotism in the US), then the introduction of 
backdoors becomes infintely more arguable. However, should law 
enforcement be distinguished from law making? Are the motivations of 
those that want to form a new society different to those that just want 
to lock up the people who don't?

The SSSCA is a prime example of universal back entrancing - an 
introduction of government-certified security schemes? What chance would 
there be that any, if not all of them, would have some kind of 
unpublicised (at least at first) get-in clause? This scares me more than 
any possible security flaw...

When the state becomes a higher priority than the people within it, Bad 
Things happen.

 
> Is it easier to achieve the dream of monitored systems if the OS
> business is highly monopolistic or if it is chaotic?


Business monopoly is one way of doing it. Legal presidence over the 
parts you actually want to control, in order to start eating at 
everything else is a lot more effective. And easier to maintain.

.g