3 ms·

I personally think if there is a warrant the company should provide information. The same way my house is private but if there is any kind of problem police has

by guilhas 10y ago

I personally think if there is a warrant the company should provide information. The same way my house is private but if there is any kind of problem police has access to it. Although we should have mechanism to protect from mass random surveillance.

natch 10y ago
So, no matter how bad the government, and how ridiculous its laws (let's say they ban music, and dole out harsh punishments to people who dare listen to music), then we as technology providers should enable them to catch such people and punish them for their "crimes"? Saudi Arabia punishes rape victims. We should help with that? China punishes people who try to air grievances about government abuse and corruption. Again, we should enable them to be more effective in their invasive prying into those individuals than they already are? In North Korea, your entire family can be punished if you dare be disobedient to the government. In the US, we recently elected Donald Trump. Etc. etc... why do you think governments can be trusted with this power? On top of all that, once the technical means exist, they will also be discovered, cracked, and used by fraudsters, extortionists, and anyone else who can figure out a way to abuse the information.
- guilhas 10y ago
  I can ask the same. Why should a suspected rapist, assassin, drug dealer, corrupt politician, be free or unjustly imprisoned, because of lack of evidence? Do you think we should help criminals? Nowadays here are other more efective ways, than encrypted WhatsApp (secrecy), to fight bad governments and ridiculous laws. North Korea and Saudi Arabia are obviously very extreme examples. Internet encryption must be the least of their worries. Governments with working justice systems should be trusted with power to provide security. There should be No technical means or backdoors globally accessible. Information should be provided on request basis, based on a warrant for that suspect. And data stored should follow data protection laws. If you think you country justice system is not working properly there are ways to fight that. And probably there will be people and institutions already doing.
  - natch 10y ago
    >Why should a suspected rapist, assassin, drug dealer, corrupt politician, be free or unjustly imprisoned, because of lack of evidence? "suspected" That includes you, so... be careful.
    - guilhas 10y ago
      If the suspect definition is wrong should be changed. Of course I am not aware how. But I cannot feel safe just because one application company is saying everything is encrypted. I am just afraid the day security is so good, there will be no more corruption leaks, and the ruling classes can do whatever they want with total privacy. My unfair imprisonment is less important, than a fair imprisonment of a corrupt politician. I think...
  - natch 10y ago
    I like how you leap from "suspected" to "Do you think we should help criminals?" North Korea and Saudi Arabia and China and the UK would claim that their justice systems are working just fine. As would my local sheriff jurisdiction where they can't even manage to hire anybody who bothers to do so much as use turn signals. If they can't even manage to do that tiny thing, greatest country on earth or no, I don't trust them with the temptations of the kind of power you're talking about. >If you think you country justice system is not working properly there are ways to fight that. LOL! Good luck! Strictly speaking, you are correct that "there are ways to fight that" but the consequences are brutal! It's a pretty big ask for most people. And that possibility will be eroded and, more likely, wholly negated by such systems.
    - guilhas 10y ago
      It was the same leap you made with > "Saudi Arabia punishes rape victims. We should help with that?" There is no temptation if they need a warrant issued by judge authorizing for the officer to request to the company information related with that suspect. Upon which the company might charge administrative costs to handle the request. I am saying suspect of a crime committed or with complaint filed against. As stated before I am against mass surveillance and crime "prediction". Even terrorism is a small problem compared with economic/political corruption. Otherwise the governments might block applications. Or secretly spy on us, with the company help if needed. All done without any supervision.

by guilhas 10y ago

natch 10y ago

So, no matter how bad the government, and how ridiculous its laws (let's say they ban music, and dole out harsh punishments to people who dare listen to music), then we as technology providers should enable them to catch such people and punish them for their "crimes"? Saudi Arabia punishes rape victims. We should help with that? China punishes people who try to air grievances about government abuse and corruption. Again, we should enable them to be more effective in their invasive prying into those individuals than they already are? In North Korea, your entire family can be punished if you dare be disobedient to the government. In the US, we recently elected Donald Trump. Etc. etc... why do you think governments can be trusted with this power? On top of all that, once the technical means exist, they will also be discovered, cracked, and used by fraudsters, extortionists, and anyone else who can figure out a way to abuse the information.

guilhas 10y ago
I can ask the same. Why should a suspected rapist, assassin, drug dealer, corrupt politician, be free or unjustly imprisoned, because of lack of evidence? Do you think we should help criminals? Nowadays here are other more efective ways, than encrypted WhatsApp (secrecy), to fight bad governments and ridiculous laws. North Korea and Saudi Arabia are obviously very extreme examples. Internet encryption must be the least of their worries. Governments with working justice systems should be trusted with power to provide security. There should be No technical means or backdoors globally accessible. Information should be provided on request basis, based on a warrant for that suspect. And data stored should follow data protection laws. If you think you country justice system is not working properly there are ways to fight that. And probably there will be people and institutions already doing.
- natch 10y ago
  >Why should a suspected rapist, assassin, drug dealer, corrupt politician, be free or unjustly imprisoned, because of lack of evidence? "suspected" That includes you, so... be careful.
  - guilhas 10y ago
    If the suspect definition is wrong should be changed. Of course I am not aware how. But I cannot feel safe just because one application company is saying everything is encrypted. I am just afraid the day security is so good, there will be no more corruption leaks, and the ruling classes can do whatever they want with total privacy. My unfair imprisonment is less important, than a fair imprisonment of a corrupt politician. I think...
- natch 10y ago
  I like how you leap from "suspected" to "Do you think we should help criminals?" North Korea and Saudi Arabia and China and the UK would claim that their justice systems are working just fine. As would my local sheriff jurisdiction where they can't even manage to hire anybody who bothers to do so much as use turn signals. If they can't even manage to do that tiny thing, greatest country on earth or no, I don't trust them with the temptations of the kind of power you're talking about. >If you think you country justice system is not working properly there are ways to fight that. LOL! Good luck! Strictly speaking, you are correct that "there are ways to fight that" but the consequences are brutal! It's a pretty big ask for most people. And that possibility will be eroded and, more likely, wholly negated by such systems.
  - guilhas 10y ago
    It was the same leap you made with > "Saudi Arabia punishes rape victims. We should help with that?" There is no temptation if they need a warrant issued by judge authorizing for the officer to request to the company information related with that suspect. Upon which the company might charge administrative costs to handle the request. I am saying suspect of a crime committed or with complaint filed against. As stated before I am against mass surveillance and crime "prediction". Even terrorism is a small problem compared with economic/political corruption. Otherwise the governments might block applications. Or secretly spy on us, with the company help if needed. All done without any supervision.