(The “so can I” was supposed to be self deprecating. But also, seriously, no way would I trust myself to do this.)
-
-
Replying to @matthew_d_green @tqbf and
Tait teaches law students enough computer security to understand how different types of exploits work. He used to work for GCHQ. Would we be comfortable with Charlie Miller on the stand? He used to work for NSA and explains vulns to journalists.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @davidcadrian @matthew_d_green and
Tait seems to have positioned himself as a technical national security expert, and not as A Person Who Got A Job Teaching And Has Opinions Online. I do not understand why or how this is the case.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davidcadrian @tqbf and
I think Thomas would be comfortable with Charlie.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
-
Replying to @matthew_d_green @tqbf and
I would like to add to this thread one thing: do not underestimate the arbitrariness by which people get called on to testify at Senate hearings. A careful, anaconda-like law enforcement agenda on encryption would be much better than the reality, which is most likely rule of derp
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I think it’s good to avoid being a knowing instrument of derp and derp theatre. Which is what today was.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @matthew_d_green @tqbf and
I'd be interested to know what you would have said in that context (I'm still working on an interminable article on this) that you feel was misleading or elided in the written statements or testimony. I realize that's a make-work tweet so please feel free to ignore
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Some of what he said is right. But then he claims that CSAM scanning can he moved to the client in an offhand way, says we can do device encryption backdoors (“though with difficulty”), and his view on wiretapping is undefined except that 0days are currently sufficient.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
The device encryption part of the debate seems the one where everyone is in closest agreement on what an implementation would look like (some flavor of key escrow), and the argument is really about policy and tradeoffs.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Matt mentioned that but he never explained why. And it’s very clear that the people on this committee and in law enforcement don’t care about that at all.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.