10 ms·
I'd like to see somebody express this in front of lawmakers: > The encryption was not a factor in their successful evasion. Rather, it was the content of the m
by mr_spothawk 10y ago
I'd like to see somebody express this in front of lawmakers:
> The encryption was not a factor in their successful evasion. Rather, it was the content of the messages, controlled and dictated by the security rules, which protected their secrets.
- nickpsecurity 10y agoI'm not sure that's possible given concealment was essential. Just as it is offline. The argument for lawmakers is that neutral, legitimate technology always gets abused by a tiny minority for criminal purposes. Yet, we don't ban or sabotage that technology. One can illustrate the many, good things encryption protects, the few bad things it conceals, alternative methods of concealment crooks might switch to, and prior failures of escrow. Then, it's an argument whether lawmakers want to destroy or put at risk all the good things done by innocent people to temporarily stop some crooks. I argue that's a bad tradeoff.