CFR China Expert: US Tech Firms Should Worry About Beijing's New Anti-Terror Law 50
blottsie writes: In an interview with the Daily Dot on Tuesday, Adam Segal, director of the Council on Foreign Relations' Digital and Cyberspace Policy Program explained what China's new anti-terrorism law contains, what aspects of it remain uncertain, and how China's interest in encrypted technology fits into its longtime strategy of regulating speech within its borders. On the subject of Apple and Chinese relations he says: "We seem to be on a road of eventual confrontation between the Chinese government and Apple. Apple may have to make a decision about what it’s going to do to remain in the China market like lots of other companies. So far, it hasn’t been explicitly laid out that way. The Chinese government hasn’t said, 'We’re not going to allow end-to-end [encryption],' but that clearly seems to be the trend. I’m sure that U.S. tech companies that are providing [end-to-end encryption] are beginning to think that they may be facing a 'high noon at the O.K. Corral' kind of moment."
You first (Score:5, Interesting)
The Chinese will wait until the US, UK and Australia implement this first, then will activate their own rules.
Re: (Score:1)
The Chinese will wait until the US, UK and Australia implement this first, then will activate their own rules.
Yes, some presidential candidates have said this, but now it is "controversial" because China said it?
Might actually be fun. "If I'm elected to be your president, I'll follow in the footsteps of China to limit your encryption. Don't ask what you can encrypt for your country but ask what you can send in plain text for country!"
Re: (Score:2)
All those candidates want the decryption ONLY for the US gov't. It would be morally wrong for these tech companies to give in and do it for any other country.
Re: (Score:2)
Hrm. It would be morally wrong for these tech companies to give in and do it for any country, including their own.
Exactly in the same way it was morally wrong for Google to support censorship in China, in order to "do business there".
For me, the day I saw that in the news, as many years ago as it was, was the day I knew "Do No Evil" was a piece of trash slogan they never intended to follow.
That was the day I stopped using any Google "social" services, and started using other search engines again. Even Bing.
Re: (Score:2)
The general wish of the chinese citizens is that the censored stuff should remain censored.
And how did they arrive at that "opinion", do you think? It's an opinion that is not shared by any Western nation.
Re: (Score:1)
The US already implemented it. It is called CISA. Good luck.
You want to make keys, or handcuffs? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He isn't the only one, you nameless tool.
Re: (Score:1)
Not two Slashtards! That's the apocalypse for any company.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh no! Don't post such scary things. CEOs of tech companies all over the world are practically peeing themselves with worry!
Re: (Score:2)
If you make handcuffs, don't expect any business from me.
Not even the pink ones that go so well with latex clothing?
Let them. (Score:3)
Let the Chinese make their people potential victims, they will pay the price, not us.
Of course our own government is trying the same thing. It that case I will simply be ignoring the law if it passes.
Simple solution (Score:2, Interesting)
- create a new encryption algorithm with a government backdoor
- ship it in builds destined for China, and make it the default
- don't ship it anywhere else
- now nobody outside of China is made insecure, *plus* savvy people in China can just disable it
- profit!
Re: (Score:1)
Why would they do that when it'd just be cheaper to use the weak one eveywhere?
Apple's implementation makes it difficult.. (Score:4, Informative)
Apple implementation of iMessage uses public key encryption; The device (iPhone) has a security chip that generates the keys and performs the encryption .... The public key is given out, while the private key is inaccessible to the CPU (even if it's rooted). This makes end-to-end encryption a de-facto part of the iMessage protocol-- but also makes it difficult to install an (undetectable) backdoor.
Re:Apple's implementation makes it difficult.. (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems to me that China doesn't need to confront Apple... or Google for that matter. They control the network. China can just continue to "encourage" their citizens to use state-friendly social media platforms, and continue to make it hard-to-impossible to use non-Chinese alternatives like Twitter, Whatsapp, or iMessage.
Re: (Score:1)
According to one article I read, 85% all iPhone 5s(for example) are assembled in China. Why wouldn't they just "fix them up" themselves.
Re: (Score:1)
Simple answer: they don’t. You’ve actually got one set of keys for each device you add to iCloud, and each iMessage is encrypted independently for each device. So if you have two devices — say, an iPad and an iPhone — each message sent to you is actually encrypted (AES-128) and stored on Apple’s
Re: (Score:2)
Which, incidentally, means that it is likely possible for Apple to surreptitiously add a device to your account. So upon subpoena, it seems likely that Apple could grant access to all future messages, just not messages that have already been sent.
The Council on Foreign Relations (Score:1)
Gag me
Re: (Score:2)
A conspiracy theorist's work is never done.
Let 'em have both barrels (Score:2)
Everybody flood the whole sewer of China with tools of freedom.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What will this do it open source? (Score:1)
And when do we get our damn 3D printers to make our own hardware that can't be controlled by the authorities?
Re: (Score:1)
You can use the ones in prison, they are government sanctioned.
morons (Score:1)
Why an american company does business in a communist dictatorship is mind boggling. They sold their soul to the devil!