3 ms·

Encryption could also help obstruct justice and let criminals get away with things. Most people won't understand till it impacts them personally but imagine if

Encryption could also help obstruct justice and let criminals get away with things. Most people won't understand till it impacts them personally but imagine if you are robbed of all your money and the answer of who did it lies in a computer you are able to get your hand on. Wouldn't you love it if the police had a backdoor now. You are wrong in framing the debate as security vs security. Its like everything else when it comes to liberty and protection. The question is how much liberty are we willing to give up for protection. We can't let a corporation or the government anchor our opinions on the left or right.

autoreleasepool 11y ago
Can you cite a case where encryption has obstructed justice or prevented a crime from being solved?
- FreedomToCreate 11y ago
  Yes, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/apple-google-when-phone-encryption-blocks-justice.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/apple-google-when-... Also I believe even without the citation that the notion that criminals can use encryption to protect themselves is pretty obvious.
  - autoreleasepool 11y ago
    Even more obvious is the notion that innocent civilians use encryption to protect themselves from mass survelence and needless data collection. Is the end goal no longer total information awareness? [0] Side note: that was a rather scathing and slanted article you cited. It would have been nice to see the simple facts of the case presented in a neutral light. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness
    - FreedomToCreate 11y ago
      My point is that encryption is good and bad, but we can't completely enable it to be utilized for criminal activity. There will be the need for a resolution to be reached on who gets access to this information, in what situations, and maybe even strict prosecution if the information is ever used incorrectly.
      - autoreleasepool 11y ago
        Encryption is either secure or it isn't. You can't have a middle ground. It's unfortunate that under rare, and very particular circumstances criminals can perhaps evade crimes because they have access encryption, but it's also unfortunate that they can get away with crimes because they have access to guns, knives, vaults, cars, basements, gasoline, matches, duck tape, chain saws, shovels, etc... Yet we don't cripple the effectiveness of these items for the sake of preventing crime. Doing so would only harm the quality of lives of the vast majority of innocent people who we trust to use these thing for their own benefit as free citizitens of a free country.
        FreedomToCreate 11y ago
        >unfortunate that they can get away with crimes because they have access to guns, knives, vaults, cars, basements, gasoline, matches, duck tape, chain saws, shovels, etc... But investigators can get access to basements, cars, knives and guns and use them to solve the crime. In this case, post-crime, there is no way to gather information that could be important.
        owtM 11y ago
        What's working at the pentagon like?
        autoreleasepool 11y ago
        > But investigators can get access to basements, cars, knives and guns and use them to solve the crime. In this case, post-crime, there is no way to gather information that could be important. Which is irrelevant to how these individual items are used to actually prevent the crime from being solved. While encryption prevents access to information that may or may not be useful, guns are used to kill witnesses that are never found, shovels are used to burry bodies that take decades to find, cars are impounded or destroyed after a getaway, I could go on. Often enough, even if any of these items are found, it doesn't help solve the crime because the criminal was simply too smart. I fail to see why encryption is being treated differently than any other legal thing we, as free and innocent citizens, have access to. The cynic in me believes the only actual difference is in the level of familiarity the majority of the voting population has with this particular legal thing. They seem to have, unfortunately, been misinformed and poorly educated about this issue and technology in general.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
mikhailt 11y ago
> Encryption could also help obstruct justice and let criminals get away with things. That's fine with me. The actions of the few does not justify the loss of privacy for all. > Most people won't understand till it impacts them personally but imagine if you are robbed of all your money and the answer of who did it lies in a computer you are able to get your hand on. Wouldn't you love it if the police had a backdoor now. No, I don't. Because that means the police can get into my data at any given time without any oversight and without me ever knowing it. It also means that anyone could attack my system and get that money as well. I've been in this situation many times in the past, I've lost a lot of sensitive data because I forgot the password to my encrypted DMG files and I've moved on and I still encrypt my stuff in the DMG files. Do I think the police and others should have a backdoor into my DMG files? No, and there is absolutely nothing that will ever justify it, not even terrorism or even the life of my family. More Americans have been killed by Americans in the past few years than the entire history of terrorist attacks combined. How about we take actions to ban guns in the country and see how it works. > The question is how much liberty are we willing to give up for protection. None. I don't deserve protection if I don't care about my privacy. > We can't let a corporation or the government anchor our opinions on the left or right. Sure we can, by voting and with our money. People trust Apple because they do focus on security of their devices. It was the same thing with RIM/BlackBerry.
allworknoplay 11y ago
Of course criminals can use encryption. I didn't say they couldn't. I said it was security vs. security, because there are security issues on both sides. Duh?

autoreleasepool 11y ago

Can you cite a case where encryption has obstructed justice or prevented a crime from being solved?

FreedomToCreate 11y ago
Yes, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/apple-google-when-phone-encryption-blocks-justice.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/apple-google-when-... Also I believe even without the citation that the notion that criminals can use encryption to protect themselves is pretty obvious.
- autoreleasepool 11y ago
  Even more obvious is the notion that innocent civilians use encryption to protect themselves from mass survelence and needless data collection. Is the end goal no longer total information awareness? [0] Side note: that was a rather scathing and slanted article you cited. It would have been nice to see the simple facts of the case presented in a neutral light. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness
  - FreedomToCreate 11y ago
    My point is that encryption is good and bad, but we can't completely enable it to be utilized for criminal activity. There will be the need for a resolution to be reached on who gets access to this information, in what situations, and maybe even strict prosecution if the information is ever used incorrectly.
    - autoreleasepool 11y ago
      Encryption is either secure or it isn't. You can't have a middle ground. It's unfortunate that under rare, and very particular circumstances criminals can perhaps evade crimes because they have access encryption, but it's also unfortunate that they can get away with crimes because they have access to guns, knives, vaults, cars, basements, gasoline, matches, duck tape, chain saws, shovels, etc... Yet we don't cripple the effectiveness of these items for the sake of preventing crime. Doing so would only harm the quality of lives of the vast majority of innocent people who we trust to use these thing for their own benefit as free citizitens of a free country.
      - FreedomToCreate 11y ago
        >unfortunate that they can get away with crimes because they have access to guns, knives, vaults, cars, basements, gasoline, matches, duck tape, chain saws, shovels, etc... But investigators can get access to basements, cars, knives and guns and use them to solve the crime. In this case, post-crime, there is no way to gather information that could be important.
        owtM 11y ago
        What's working at the pentagon like?
        autoreleasepool 11y ago
        > But investigators can get access to basements, cars, knives and guns and use them to solve the crime. In this case, post-crime, there is no way to gather information that could be important. Which is irrelevant to how these individual items are used to actually prevent the crime from being solved. While encryption prevents access to information that may or may not be useful, guns are used to kill witnesses that are never found, shovels are used to burry bodies that take decades to find, cars are impounded or destroyed after a getaway, I could go on. Often enough, even if any of these items are found, it doesn't help solve the crime because the criminal was simply too smart. I fail to see why encryption is being treated differently than any other legal thing we, as free and innocent citizens, have access to. The cynic in me believes the only actual difference is in the level of familiarity the majority of the voting population has with this particular legal thing. They seem to have, unfortunately, been misinformed and poorly educated about this issue and technology in general.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

mikhailt 11y ago

> Encryption could also help obstruct justice and let criminals get away with things. That's fine with me. The actions of the few does not justify the loss of privacy for all. > Most people won't understand till it impacts them personally but imagine if you are robbed of all your money and the answer of who did it lies in a computer you are able to get your hand on. Wouldn't you love it if the police had a backdoor now. No, I don't. Because that means the police can get into my data at any given time without any oversight and without me ever knowing it. It also means that anyone could attack my system and get that money as well. I've been in this situation many times in the past, I've lost a lot of sensitive data because I forgot the password to my encrypted DMG files and I've moved on and I still encrypt my stuff in the DMG files. Do I think the police and others should have a backdoor into my DMG files? No, and there is absolutely nothing that will ever justify it, not even terrorism or even the life of my family. More Americans have been killed by Americans in the past few years than the entire history of terrorist attacks combined. How about we take actions to ban guns in the country and see how it works. > The question is how much liberty are we willing to give up for protection. None. I don't deserve protection if I don't care about my privacy. > We can't let a corporation or the government anchor our opinions on the left or right. Sure we can, by voting and with our money. People trust Apple because they do focus on security of their devices. It was the same thing with RIM/BlackBerry.

allworknoplay 11y ago

Of course criminals can use encryption. I didn't say they couldn't. I said it was security vs. security, because there are security issues on both sides. Duh?