Jeb Bush Claims That Creating Encryption Harms America
from the wanna-try-that-one-again? dept
Sometimes you have to wonder if the various political candidates are trying to lose the knowledgeable techie vote. Chris Christie has been strongly pro-surveillance, and it's not hard to guess where he would come down on the whole "backdooring encryption" debate. However, few of the other candidates have been directly asked about that -- though that may be changing. Jeb Bush has now stated that he's against encryption, because, apparently it harms America.This is, of course, mostly deeply wrong, while also partially right, but for the wrong reasons. First of all, if we want Americans to be safer we should be demanding more encryption, not less. It is a confused state of mind that, just as we keep hearing about more and more data being leaked and hacked into whether by individual malicious hackers or, potentially, nation states, thinks the "answer" to this is somehow less security, rather than more.“If you create encryption, it makes it harder for the American government to do its job—while protecting civil liberties—to make sure that evildoers aren’t in our midst,” Bush said in South Carolina at an event sponsored by Americans for Peace, Prosperity, and Security, a group with close ties to military contractors.
Bush said “we need to find a new arrangement with Silicon Valley in this regard because I think this is a very dangerous kind of situation.”
However, in a weird way, Bush is actually correct. In some instances, encryption actually does make the government's job harder. But that's a feature, not a bug. Bush should, perhaps, listen to his brother's former Homeland Security Secretary, Michael Chertoff who recently came out against backdooring encryption, noting:
... we do not historically organize our society to make it maximally easy for law enforcement, even with court orders, to get information. We often make trade-offs and we make it more difficult. If that were not the case then why wouldn’t the government simply say all of these [takes out phone] have to be configured so they’re constantly recording everything that we say and do and then when you get a court order it gets turned over and we wind up convicting ourselves. So I don’t think socially we do that.This is an important point that Jeb Bush (and many folks in favor of backdooring encryption) don't seem to get.
Separately, from Bush's quote, it appears he's not even familiar with the details of the debate (not that this stops him from opining ignorantly about it). By saying that merely "making" encryption is bad for America, he's just wrong. The debate isn't about making encryption. It's about whether or not encryption should be (or, realistically, can be) compromised via some sort of backdoor. Experts have explained why this actually makes us all worse off, but it's rather disturbing that people like Jeb Bush have summarized the "we should backdoor encyrption" side of things as "we should be against encryption."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cybersecurity, encryption, going dark, jeb bush, privacy
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
My god...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My god...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My god...
It's almost like he's purposely trying to run a bad campaign with bad ideas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Either way, he's lost any chance at a vote from me (not that he had one to begin with).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'll take "Both Of The Above" for $1000.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Wrong candidate or are they all smart like this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Wrong candidate or are they all smart like this?
That was Cruz.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Considering he's Texan, I expect he has it in for Evolution and Global Warming for sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did I read this correctly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong of course
The job description of the U.S. government is spelled out in the constitution. Breaking the Fourth Amendment is explicitly an automatic "Fail". It's the reason Nixon would have gotten impeached and removed from office if he hadn't resigned before that.
In contrast to that, "to make sure that evildoers aren’t in our midst" is not in the Constitution. Which is not much of a surprise because the Constitution has been written for adults.
Also the whole discussion of whether or not more or less encryption is making the U.S. safer or not is moot.
The government has demonstrated beyond all doubt that it is neither willing nor able to keep its workers from violating the Constitution systematically and premeditatedly.
In that situation, there is just no alternative for its populace to arm itself in sufficient degree against a power-hungry reckless government. Encryption is a purely defensive weapon, so it should be quite less controversial than the offensive weapons permitted by the 2nd amendment as a measure intended to keep the government sane.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong of course
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which harms America more?
* encryption
* bank safes
* the war on (some) drugs
* militarized police
* police brutality
* concentrated control and ownership of major news media
* corrupt politicians and corrupt government
* corporate lobbying (eg bribery)
* the great economic divide
* Windows 10
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which harms America more?
Can I, like, can I phone a friend?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which harms America more?
1) legal bribery (corporate lobbying)
2) Money in politics
3) concentrated control/ownership of most mass media sources
4) A corrupt SYSTEM (many politicians and government thought to be corrupt are merely following the laws that they create, so they are not corrupt, but the system is)
5) Militarized/brutal police who go unchecked. (civilian review boards could combat this)
6) Economic injustice (There is only one thing that trickles down, and it ain't money!)
7) Unregulated neo-liberal capitalism.
8) Lack of education.
9) Lack of concern for our environment (There is no Plan(et) B)
10) Android
11) Windoze (whatever version of the day it is)
12) OSX
13) iOS
14) Linux
15) the internet of things
16) "i" or "e" anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which harms America more?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"evildoers"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "evildoers"?
The figures can be drawn to make the evildoers obvious and easy to distinguish from the good guys*.
* the rich, white, fat, old, crooked, hetrosexual males who run things
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "evildoers"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "evildoers"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's either that or he's a bigger numbskull than his brother...I fear it's the last.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easy for him to say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Easy for him to say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"some people out there in our nation don't have maps"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When Curtains Block Justice
Inspired by “When Phone Encryption Blocks Justice”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/apple-google-when-phone-encryption-blocks-justic e.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When Curtains Block Justice
Who will think of the doughnuts?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When Curtains Block Justice
"When Detectives Whine That They Can't Be Lazy or Fuck Your Privacy"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if that's the case, why does America insist on having everything encrypted except what ordinary people do, say, read, and write? they have a right to privacy and freedom of speech etc, and the American Government is doing what it can to destroy that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They want it both ways.
But, they don't want it to apply to them either. They wouldn't stop using encryption or give other countries a back door so that they can spy on America. Imagine the laughter if a Russian Diplomat stopped by and said, do you mind building us a back door to your military encryption, we promise not to use it very much and only with a warrant, it'll be completely safe. Even though it's essentially the same line of bullshit they try to cram down our throats, they wouldn't give in to the demand either, so why should we?
Maybe, if they wanted to have a real conversation, they could explain why it's vital for them to have encryption for the things THEY don't want others to know, but I am supposed to give up my right to keep things confidential from the spying eyes of other countries, or even my own. But they cant do that, because it will never fit in with their narrative of having to have control over everyone and everything while they enjoy the same privileges we are supposed to give up.
So, when they are ready and willing to put their money where their mouths are, and give up encryption too, I'll be ready and willing to side with them and support the anti-encryption cause for the good of kidnapped children everywhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just imagine...
People who are trying to be, or are, in charge are proudly ignorant of all this "geek stuff" like email, files, encryption and such. They spew out stuff in the media for all to see and hear, that they NEVER uses any email or don't know how to operate a computer with something akin to glee. All the while ignoring the simple truth that IT should be very high on the knowledge front because it is quite seriously holding the world together.
They drag on and on about the threat of terror, while if it were up to them, they could ruin all of society in a day.
How proud we can be of them. Good job guys!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just imagine...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Congress is disturbed by your lack of vision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You've probably noticed - there is no intelligence or competence (or morality) requirement. Just age and natural citizenship.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually she did. You are seeing the effect on brain development the substitution of an ulcer for a placenta has.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Foreign Threats
Thomas Jefferson
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Foreign Threats
We need the great wall 'o Trump now more than evar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"—while protecting civil liberties—"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No encryption is bad
I bet some of those people affected would rather have the inconvenience of it than the sure knowledge that their personal stuff is in the hands of real 'evil-doers', who laugh at our feeble attempts to stop them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aii, yi yi!
I believe you're giving him far too much credit here. He obviously (to me, at least) hasn't any clue whatsoever what he's talking about. He's just (poorly it seems; can't even do this right) spouting talking points his handlers have told him to say. There is no evidence of actual comprehension of the ideas he's being told to say.
This is starting to explain a lot for me; how their father managed to head the CIA (a horribly disfunctional agency populated by kindergartner crack addict intellects), then get elected president, then freak out when the USSR threatened to collapse, then when The Shrub took the presidency, then in spite of all that Jeb somehow manages to look like a viable candidate for the presidency.
The US is nuts, and that family is missing some chromosomes, and it's showing more and more as you go further forward. If Jeb has any children, they might be happier in the primate exhibit at the Zoo. Sorry kids, you was robbed!
On the bright side, we don't need to care about Global Warming anymore. The US' electoral system is well on its way to destroying the world, likely in our lifetime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'...while protecting civil liberties...'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lost my vote
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lost my vote
- Crazy ass, filthy rich, racist
- Crazy ass, rich, somewhat racist, fries bacon in his guns
- Crazy ass, rich, uses gmail or something for Govt issues, has issues with Monicas
- Crazy ass, rich, ignorant, at least likes latinos
- Etc
All of them come with handy surveillance state and totalitarianism extras for your despair.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Son of a spy, brother of a spy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Charitable Interpretation of Bush's Reasoning
It's theoretically possible that he realizes that any backdoor makes encryption mostly futile.
Rather than see people entrust their personal affairs to sabotaged encryption, he could instead be against any encryption being further developed.
Therefore, saying "we should backdoor encryption" can be reduced to "we should be against encryption." This assumes we all already agree with the first statement.
See, with enough contortions, it is possible to make even a confused politician's statement make some sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A Charitable Interpretation of Bush's Reasoning
Waaaaaayyyy too charitable. :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We should have backdoor encryption
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Asspincter Says What?
Snowden and Manning 2016
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Asspincter Says What?
You should be careful with that. Manning's convicted and Snowden's accused of treason. You could be accused of aiding and giving comfort to foreign enemies. And, now you've written it you're recorded in the NSA's database.
Argentina has few if any immigration laws, fwiw.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Asspincter Says What?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Asspincter Says What?
How beautiful an act of protest that would be. Hell, it isn't like they don't have the free time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Candidate lineup
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Candidate lineup
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USG doesn't need encryption...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USG doesn't need encryption...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USG doesn't need encryption...
It already HAS classification, why encrypt corruption when you can just classify it as "confidential", "secret" or "top secret" that way if you DO find it you STILL go to jail...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this is really gonna hurt then
man that must be painful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Give another blood line a chance to wear the crown.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I think that American blood would still be too audacious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An American Indian president.
Right now I'd settle for someone who wasn't in the pocket of blue-chip corporations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If you're going to claim they're not American, then they're not European either. They're all African. Lets all meet back at Olduvai Gorge for a class reunion, and strand all the racists there when we go back home. They can try again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Last I checked, the closest requirement for being President is that you are a natural born citizen. Ancestry is irrelevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
For the first question, he means Native American. For the second, I don't know, though it would be very interesting to have a high profile Native American candidate for President. tqk's response was right on though: "If you're going to claim they're not American, then they're not European either."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Isn't he Australian? You have to be a natural-born US citizen to be President.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How do you say this without breaking into laughter, eat a shit sandwich first?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]