[Cryptography] Text of Burr-Feinstein encryption backdoor bill

[grarpamp]

> https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2797124/Burr-Feinstein-Encryption-Bill-Discussion-Draft.pdf
> https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BAG16460.pdf


Lawmaking, Crypto, and Weasel Words... One Random Read Between The Lines

> A BILL
> To require [crap]
> and for other purposes

Because "other purposes" is how you sneak in more unwanted crap
behind the first crap. And how you avoid legitimate up or down on
any single issue. Feature creep 101.

> "Compliance with Court Orders Act of 2016"

Sounds dreamy and routine doesn't it, just breeze over it on a lazy
Sunday in the park and vote yes on Monday. Nothing to see here,
move along.

> It is the sense of Congress that ...

These weasel words are particularly revolting, they smell like
flowers but they're not. They vote for them because flowers...
after all, their expected "sense" and thus their expected vote has
already been printed on paper for them by their leaders, how could
they ever vote against such pretty things. After gleefully voting
for it, they then find themselves forever trapped because this
"sense" has now been formally imposed upon their prior independance
by law. Any dissent against the enacted flowers now becomes an
embarrassing politically suicidal case of position changing, and
illegal, because it's not following the official "sense".
Disgusting.

> (1) no person or entity is above the law

Actually, they are, at least until the law exerts itself over
special selectees among them, typically reserved for dissenters.

> (2) economic growth prosperity security, stability,
> and liberty require adherence to the rule of law

Actually, none of these *require* any law, let alone blind adherance
to it.

> (3) the Constitution and laws of the United States
> provide for the safety, security, and civil
> liberties of all United States persons

No, they don't, nor are there any such guarantees.

> and the
> protections and obligations of these laws apply to
> all persons within United States jurisdiction

No, they don't.

Notice the routine trotting out of grand patriotic bullshit like
this to dispel any critical thought and bank votes on shit laws.
PATRIOT even had it in its title.

> (4) all providers of communications services and
> products (including software)

"Software"... see, they snuck in the all encompassing
grandaddy of them all... any / all / your "software",
including opensource and private use, and extends
to hardware as software in silicon.

> should protect the
> privacy of United States persons through implementation
> of appropriate data security

Stage setting under dissentproof "sense of congress" for future
legislated "security". Lots of failure there.

See also: CALEA Everywhere, plugin goatse version

> and still respect the rule
> of law and comply with all legal requirements and court
> orders

Attempt at washing away dissent, disrespect and noncompliance
as unconscionable / evil acts, or unacceptable to even think of.

> (5) to uphold both the rule of law and protect
> the interests and security of the United States,

Wait a minute, thought this US thing was about "we the people",
now it's only about "of the United States" itself?

> all persons receiving an authorized judicial order

Wait a minute, judges issue their own independant orders, all the
way up to the Supreme's, so now just exactly *who* is doing this
"authorizing" above them? You don't think the Judicial Branch will
just lay themselves over entirely to statutory law do you?
Alternatively, just what is the police force of the Judiciary, and
who does it report to?

> for
> information or data must provide, in a timely manner,
> responsive, intelligible information or data, or
> appropriate technical assistance to obtain such
> information or data

These days, thanks to your allowing them twisting it for 15+ years,
"technical assistance" now includes indefinite detention and
rubberhose "tech"niques, destruction of family / work life, asset
forfeiture, etc. Also, tricking and ratting out others is hip.

> (6) covered entities must provide responsive,
> intelligible information or data, or appropriate
> technical assistance to a government pursuant to a court order.

All "entities" to any "a government" around the world?
Nice one.


Global Order [?] brought within a Sea of Pretty Flowers.
Proudly passed by your Presidents and Congresses, stamped
by Judges picked by same.

People around the world need to be reading the crap that
gets put in their laws, then getting rid of the crap that
put it there.