> Law enforcement and the intelligence community would surely agree that these technologies are dangerous in the wrong hands, but there is no way to stop crimin

> Law enforcement and the intelligence community would surely agree that these technologies are dangerous in the wrong hands, but there is no way to stop criminals and terrorists from using these technologies without also closing the same security flaws that law enforcement uses. Unlike criminals however, law enforcement can still obtain search warrants and work directly with the phone companies to get subscribers' location, so they would not lose any capabilities if the vulnerabilities CSSs rely on were fixed. Oh law enforcement might have to begrudgingly go back to warrants as described in the 4th amendment? That would be horrible for authority overreach. Besides the trampling of your 4th amendment rights and warrantless searches, this is another example of backdoors/holes/trapdoors that exist for 'security' being abused and eventually the bad actors get it. Going with security that is backdoored or vulnerable just so 'good' actors can get in when needed is another level of trust that can be abused and will be seeked out by bad actors, even wolves in sheeps clothing within the good guys. We have world class security systems, yet plenty of keys under rocks in the backyard. It is basically leaving your window open on vacation and putting a note that says, only Sally the neighbor can come in through the window, please (Sally being the gov't or 'good' guys). Guess what, Sally won't be the only one coming in.