Connect with us

Nevada

Reject Nevada’s Attack on Encrypted Messaging, EFF Tells Court

Published

on

Reject Nevada’s Attack on Encrypted Messaging, EFF Tells Court


LAS VEGAS — The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and a coalition of partners urged a court to protect default encrypted messaging and children’s privacy and security in a brief filed today.

The brief by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Nevada, the EFF, Stanford Internet Observatory Research Scholar Riana Pfefferkorn, and six other organizations asks the court to reject a request by Nevada’s attorney general to stop Meta from offering end-to-end encryption by default to Facebook Messenger users under 18 in the state. The brief was also signed by Access Now, Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), Fight for the Future, Internet Society, Mozilla, and Signal Messenger LLC.

Communications are safer when third parties can’t listen in on them. That’s why the EFF and others who care about privacy pushed Meta for years to make end-to-end encryption the default option in Messenger. Meta finally made the change, but Nevada wants to turn back the clock. As the brief notes, end-to-end encryption “means that even if someone intercepts the messages—whether they are a criminal, a domestic abuser, a foreign despot, or law enforcement—they will not be able to decipher or access the message.” The state of Nevada, however, bizarrely argues that young people would be better off without this protection.

“Encryption is the best tool we have for safeguarding our privacy and security online — and privacy and security are especially important for young people,” said EFF Surveillance Litigation Director Andrew Crocker. “Nevada’s argument that children need to be ‘protected’ from securely communicating isn’t just baffling; it’s dangerous.”

Advertisement

As explained in a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the EFF and others today, encryption is one of the best ways to reclaim our privacy and security in a digital world full of cyberattacks and security breaches. It is increasingly being deployed across the internet as a way to protect users and data. For children and their families especially, encrypted communication is one of the strongest safeguards they have against malicious misuse of their private messages — a safeguard Nevada seeks to deny them.

“The European Court of Human Rights recently rejected a Russian law that would have imposed similar requirements on services that offer end-to-end message encryption – finding that it violated human rights and EU law to deny people the security and privacy that encryption provides,” said EFF’s Executive Director Cindy Cohn. “Nevada’s attempt should be similarly rejected.”

In its motion to the court, Nevada argues that it is necessary to block end-to-end encryption on Facebook Messenger because it can impede some criminal investigations involving children. This ignores that law enforcement can and does conduct investigations involving encrypted messages, which can be reported by users and accessed from either the sender or recipient’s devices. It also ignores law enforcement’s use of the tremendous amount of additional information about users that Meta routinely collects.

The brief notes that co-amicus Pfeffercorn recently authored a study that confirmed that Nevada does not, in fact, need to block encryption to do its investigations. The study found that “content-oblivious” investigation methods are “considered more useful than monitoring the contents of users’ communications when it comes to detecting nearly every kind of online abuse.” 

“The court should reject Nevada’s motion,” said EFF’s Crocker. “Making children more vulnerable in just to make law enforcement investigators’ jobs slightly easier is an uneceesary and dangerous trade off.”

Advertisement

For the brief: https://www.eff.org/document/nevada-v-meta-amicus-brief



Source link

Nevada

IN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada

Published

on

IN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada


A recent Review-Journal letter to the editor mischaracterized Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto’s Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, also known as the Clark County Lands bill. As the former executive director of the Nevada Conservation League, I wholeheartedly support this legislation, so I wanted to set the record straight.

Sen. Cortez Masto has been working on this bill for years in partnership with state and local governments, conservation groups like the NCL and local area tribes. It’s true that the Clark County lands bill would open 25,000 acres to help Las Vegas grow responsibly, while setting aside 2 million acres for conservation. It would also help create more affordable housing throughout the valley while ensuring our treasured public spaces can be preserved for generations to come.

What is not correct is that the money from these land sales would go to the federal government’s coffers. In fact, the opposite is true.

The 1998 Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act is a landmark bill that identified specific public land for future sale and created a special account ensuring all land sale revenues would come back to Nevada. In accordance with that law 5 percent of revenue from land transfers goes to the state of Nevada for general education purposes, 10 percent goes to the Southern Nevada Water Authority for needed water infrastructure and 85 percent supports conservation and environmental mitigation projects in Southern Nevada. This legislation has provided billions to Clark County and will continue to benefit generations of Southern Nevadans. Sen. Cortez Masto’s lands bill builds upon the act’s success.

Advertisement

So here’s the good news: All of the money generated from land made available for sale under Sen. Cortez Masto’s bill would be sent to the special account created by the 1998 law. Rather than going to an unaccountable federal government, the proceeds would continue to help kids in Vegas get a better education, bolster outdoor recreation and modernize Southern Nevada’s infrastructure.

I know how important it is that money generated from the sale of public land in Nevada stay in the hands of Nevadans, and so does the senator. That’s why she opposed a Republican effort last year to sell off 200,000 acres of land in Clark County and other areas of the country that would have sent those dollars directly to Washington.

Public land management in Nevada should benefit Nevadans. We should protect sacred cultural sites and beloved recreation spaces, responsibly transfer land for affordable housing when needed and ensure our state has the resources it needs to grow sustainably. I will continue working with Sen. Cortez Masto to advocate for legislation, such as the Clark County lands bill, that puts the needs of Nevadans first.

Paul Selberg writes from Las Vegas.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

Las Vegas High beats Coronado in 5A baseball — PHOTOS

Published

on

Las Vegas High beats Coronado in 5A baseball — PHOTOS