3 ms·
You don't need to take on cryptography to fight cybercrime. Cybercrime usually leaves huge trail of evidence. Usually in form of lost money (transactions) and b
by guard-of-terra 10y ago
You don't need to take on cryptography to fight cybercrime. Cybercrime usually leaves huge trail of evidence. Usually in form of lost money (transactions) and bricked devices.
Fighting cybercrime has different obstacles: it's usually cross-border, and its victims are usually common people. Nobody cares terribly much when a commoner loses $100. Even when there's a thousand of them.
What you need to take on cryptography, is "to snoop".
Why would you need that, huh?
- Zigurd 10y ago> Usually in form of lost money (transactions) and bricked devices. This is precisely why law enforcement doesn't need to weaken encryption nor weaken the rights of suspects and defendants. If there is a material crime, that crime has left a trail of evidence in the real world, especially a money trail. And if you think Leviathan needs unbounded powers or you'll be left as a tasty morsel in the state of nature, physics has always bounded state power, and injustices happen when state power is pushed beyond natural bounds.