>As they are still so keen on controlling encryption we can assume with good confidence that so far they have failed. I think the real issue with relating thei

>As they are still so keen on controlling encryption we can assume with good confidence that so far they have failed. I think the real issue with relating their position on legislation to their ability to break any given algorithm (Or the problem on which it is based) is this: Legislation will survive a new, more secure algorithm. Breaking one algorithm is subject to being patched out or the algorithm being entirely replaced. A broken system is a short-term investment, legislation is long-term (With the assumption that the government enforcing the legislation sticks around).