![](\"https:\/\/tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com\/2017\/03\/gettyimages-655591396.jpg?w=738\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Answering questions at a Senate oversight committee hearing this morning,\u00a0FBI Director James Comey has hinted\u00a0at growing consensus\u00a0between\u00a0technology companies and intelligence\u00a0agencies over the controversial issue of how to access encrypted data.<\/p>\n
He also supported what appears to be a fresh\u00a0push\u00a0by\u00a0senator Dianne Feinstein to introduce\u00a0legislation\u00a0to enable\u00a0courts to\u00a0order access to encrypted devices.<\/p>\n
In a written statement to the Judiciary committee, Comey\u00a0said the FBI had been unable to\u00a0access the contents of more than 3,000 mobile devices in the first half of the fiscal year, using what he described as \u201cappropriate and available technical tools, even though there was the legal authority to do so\u201d.<\/p>\n
He said\u00a0that represented \u201cnearly half\u201d of all the mobile devices it had attempted to access in that timeframe. In the statement he also argued that\u00a0case-by-case investigative workarounds to gain access to encrypted devices are \u201cdifficult to scale\u201d and \u201cmay be perishable due to a short technical lifecycle\u201d or else as a consequence of an exploit being disclosed via legal proceedings.<\/p>\n
Feinstein asked him how many of those devices had related to counterterrorism enquiries \u2014 and Comey\u00a0committed to letting her know, though\u00a0he did not give the figure\u00a0in the public meeting.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ve had very good open and productive conversations with the private sector over the last 18 months about this issue, because everybody realizes we care about the same things. We all love privacy, we all care about public safety and none of us want backdoors \u2014 we don\u2019t want access to devices built in in some way. What we want to work with the manufacturers on is to figure out how can we accommodate both interests in a sensible way,\u201d said Comey in response to a question from senator Hatch about the security risks of backdoors being built in to enable access to encrypted data.<\/p>\n
\u201cHow can we optimize the privacy, security features of their devices and allow court orders to be complied with. We\u2019re having some good conversations \u2014 I don\u2019t know where they\u2019re going to end up, frankly. I could imagine a world that ends up with legislation saying that if you\u2019re going to make devices in the US you figure out how to comply with court orders. Or maybe we don\u2019t go there. But we are having productive conversations right now I think.\u201d<\/p>\n
In February<\/a> last year a California judge ordered Apple to unlock an iPhone for\u00a0the\u00a0FBI, after the bureau took legal action to try to gain access to encrypted data on the device, which had been used by one of the San Bernadino shooters. The FBI asked\u00a0Apple to alter\u00a0the device\u2019s security system to enable the passcode to be brute forced. Apple refused, and framed this as a demand it build\u00a0a backdoor. The high profile court battle ultimately ended after the\u00a0FBI paid a third party company to gain\u00a0access to the device via an exploit\u00a0in the security system.<\/p>\n During today\u2019s\u00a0hearing, senator Feinstein raised\u00a0the San Bernadino incident, suggesting\u00a0she intends to reintroduce a bill\u00a0to require tech companies decrypt customers\u2019 data at a court\u2019s request. Her prior attempt<\/a>\u00a0at legislating\u00a0failed to garner enough support and the bill was withdrawn last year. But it looks like\u00a0Feinstein is ready to wage crypto war again this year.<\/p>\n \u201cWe had looked at legislation that would take into consideration events of national security and provide that devices \u2014 there must be some way of even going before a judge and getting a court order to be able to open a device,\u201d said Feinstein, asking if Comey thought the approach\u00a0would work.<\/p>\n He\u00a0responded affirmatively\u00a0\u2014 saying such\u00a0legislation would be \u201cbetter from a public safety perspective\u201d. \u201cWe\u2019ve had a lot of conversations [with tech companies],\u201d he reiterated. \u2018\u201dAnd in my sense they\u2019ve been getting more productive because I think the tech companies have come to see the darkness a little bit more \u2014 my concern was privacy\u2019s really important but they didn\u2019t see the public safety cost. I think they\u2019re starting to see that better.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat nobody wants to have happen is something terrible happen in the United States and it be connected to our inability to access information with lawful authority. We ought to have the conversations before that happens. And the companies more and more get that, I think in the last year and a half. But it\u2019s vital.\u201d<\/p>\n We have to figure out a way to optimize those two things: privacy and public safety.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n \u201cWe weren\u2019t picking on Apple in the San Bernadino case,\u201d he added. \u201cThere were real reasons why we needed to get into that device \u2014 and that is true in case after case after case. And that is why we have to figure out a way to optimize those two things: privacy and public safety.\u201d<\/p>\n Feinstein also said she intends to push\u00a0legislate to require\u00a0tech companies to report terrorist-related and other illegal activity on their platforms \u2014 flagging similar\u00a0recommendations published by a UK parliamentary commitee<\/a>\u00a0this week. And Comey was of course also fully behind\u00a0this proposal too, agreeing with Feinstein the FBI would benefit from knowing about such activity \u2014 albeit adding in the caveat that it be \u201cwith a judge\u2019s permission\u201d.<\/p>\n During the session, Comey also made repeat plays\u00a0for expanding the scope of national security letters (NSL) \u2014 arguing\u00a0that these administrative subpoenas were always intended to\u00a0be able\u00a0to acquire information from\u00a0Internet companies, not just from telcos.<\/p>\n \u201cBecause of what I believe is a typo in the law \u2014 and if I\u2019m wrong Congress will tell me that they intended this \u2014 companies that provide the same services but on the Internet resist,\u201d he told the \u00a0hearing. \u201cAnd say we don\u2019t have the statutory authority to serve an NSL to find out the subscriber to a particular email handle or what addresses were in contact with what addresses.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think Congress intended that distinction but what it does do us is in our most important investigations it requires us that if we want to find out the subscriber info to a particular email to go and get an order from a federal judge in Washington as part of the FISA court. An incredibly long and difficult process. And I\u2019m worried about that slowing us down \u2014 and I\u2019m also worried about it being a disincentive for our investigators to do it at all.\u201d<\/p>\n On the issue of whether\u00a0Section 702<\/a>\u00a0of the Foreign Intelligence Services Act (FISA) should be reauthorized, Comey mounted a robust defense of intelligence agencies\u2019 need for the provision \u2014 describing it as \u201ca critical tool to protect this country\u201d.<\/p>\n The contentious portion of FISA effectively creates a loophole allowing for warrantless surveillance of US citizens via so-called \u2018incidental collection\u2019 of their communications. It is also controversial in Europe for\u00a0effectively enabling the trampling of EU citizens\u2019 fundamental rights \u2014 a factor that helped derail a\u00a0long-standing transatlantic data transfer arrangement, and continues to cause trouble for its replacement agreement<\/a>\u00a0(the EU-US Privacy Shield).<\/p>\n Section 702 of FISA is due to\u00a0expire at the end of this year unless it is actively\u00a0renewed by Congress \u2014 and the possibility of it being sunsetted entirely\u00a0appeared to be of\u00a0most concern to Comey.<\/p>\n Asked to explain why the provision is so vital for US intelligence efforts, he\u00a0said: \u201cReally bad people around the world, because of the genius of American innovation, use our products and infrastructure for their emails, for their communications. And what 702 allows us to do is quickly target terrorists, weapons of mass destruction proliferators, spies, cyberhackers, who are using our infrastructure to communicate, to target them quickly and collect information on them. And it is vital to all parts of the intelligence community, because of its agility, its speed and its effectiveness.<\/p>\n \u201cIf we were required to establish the normal warrant process for these non-Americans who aren\u2019t in our country just because the photons they\u2019re using to plan attacks cross our country\u2019s lands, we\u2019d be tasked for reasons that make no sense at all and the courts have said are unnecessary under the fourth amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n He added that another intelligence gathering tool \u2014 the telephony metadata database \u2014 \u201cdoes not compare in importance to 702\u201d, arguing baldly\u00a0that: \u201cWe can\u2019t lose 702.\u201d<\/p>\n Comey also faced a few less\u00a0soft-ball\u00a0questions on the provision\u00a0\u2014 including being questioned\u00a0about the practice of unmasking (i.e. identifying) American citizens whose communications have been harvested \u2018accidentally\u2019 via Section 702.<\/p>\n Asked whether the bureau has ever requested the\u00a0unmasking of a US citizen, he\u00a0suggested this is commonplace, responding:\u00a0\u201cOh yes. I did it this week in connection with an intelligence report.\u201d\u00a0Comey\u00a0was then grilled on\u00a0the process for making unmasking\u00a0requests,\u00a0how many people are authorized\u00a0to make them, and where records of such requests would\u00a0be stored.<\/p>\n Later in the session he\u00a0was also asked whether a narrowing of the definition of Section 702\u00a0to exclude using it to gather intelligence on \u201cforeign affairs\u201d \u2014 which clearly allows for a very wide range of data to be sucked up \u2014 would still enable the core intent to function. Perhaps surprisingly\u00a0the FBI chief\u00a0agreed that limiting it\u00a0to information relevant for\u00a0national security purposes would not undermine its core intelligence utility, although \u201cnational security\u201d can\u00a0still be a pretty broad umbrella for catching data.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would seem so, logically,\u201d he told senator Lee. \u201cTo me the value of 702 is exactly that: where the rubber hits the road in the national security context. Especially counterterrorism, counter proliferation.\u201d<\/p>\n During the hearing, Comey inevitably faced a barrage\u00a0of questions about the FBI\u2019s investigation into Hillary\u00a0Clinton\u2019s use of a private email server, with the FBI chief defending when and how he reported the conclusion of the probe, and\u00a0the subsequent letter sent to Congress at a key moment of the 2016 presidential campaign \u2014 potentially contributing to swinging votes to\u00a0Trump.<\/p>\n \u201cIt was an incredibly difficult choice,\u201d he said on this at one point, after senators had again returned to the topic. \u201cThe desire\u00a0was to act independently, credibly and honestly\u2026 We made judgements trying to do the right thing, and I believe even with hindsight we made the right decision.\u201d<\/p>\n He was\u00a0also repeatedly asked\u00a0about potential links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. But on this theme Comey generally declined to answer \u2014 saying he did not wish\u00a0to make public comments that might prejudice the\u00a0ongoing investigation.<\/p>\n Concerns were also raised about the security of election infrastructure in the light of Russian efforts to hack or otherwise influence US\u00a0politics, and Comey was asked what the FBI is doing specifically to help defend against such foreign cybersecurity threats.<\/p>\n On this he said the bureau shares intelligence on hackers\u2019\u00a0\u201ctools, tactics and techniques\u201d with the department of homeland security and with state and local election officials\u00a0so they can \u201charden their networks\u201d.\u00a0\u201cOne of the most important things we can do is equip them with the information to make their systems tighter,\u201d he said, noting that voter registration databases have been one election-related hacking target.<\/p>\n The Yahoo email hack<\/a> also briefly came up, with\u00a0Comey describing\u00a0Russian government organizations as having \u201ca relationship that\u2019s often difficult to define with criminals\u201d. \u201cThe Yahoo hack is an example of that,\u201d he noted. \u201cYou had some of Russian\u2019s greatest criminal hackers and intelligence agency hackers working together.\u201d<\/p>\n Questioned by senators on\u00a0Wikileaks, Comey would not confirm whether or not the FBI has any charges pending against Julian Assange \u2014 but did say that in\u00a0his view the organization has endangered \u201cboth\u201d US lives and US interests.<\/p>\n Asked to explain the\u00a0difference between Wikileaks and journalism, he added: \u201cTo my mind it crosses a line when it moves from being about trying to educate a public and instead just become about \u2018intelligence porn\u2019, frankly, just pushing out information about sources and methods without regard to interest, without regard to the first amendment values that normally underlie press reporting \u2014 and simply becomes a conduit for the Russian intelligence services or some other adversary of the US just to push out information to damage the US.\u201d<\/p>\n Featured Image: Drew Angerer\/Getty Images<\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n\n
FISA: Section 702<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Clinton, Trump, Assange\u2026\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com\/2017\/03\/gettyimages-655591396.jpg?w=680\")
Answering questions at a Senate oversight committee hearing this morning, FBI Director James Comey has hinted at growing consensus between technology companies and intelligence agencies over the controversial issue of how to access encrypted data. He also supported what appears to be a fresh push by senator Dianne Feinstein to introduce legislation to enable courts to order access to… Read More<\/a><\/p>\n\n<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5817,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[59,66,26],"class_list":["post-340008","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-technology","tag-media","tag-techcrunch","tag-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340008","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5817"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=340008"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340008\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=340008"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=340008"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=340008"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}