3 ms·

> If it is then we should just publicly say that the government shouldn’t be able to tap phones regardless of what technology they are using to communicate. Th

> If it is then we should just publicly say that the government shouldn’t be able to tap phones regardless of what technology they are using to communicate. They can tap phones, and should be able to tap phones, along with VoIP, video calls, and mail. But while privacy isn't absolute, their ability to wiretap communications with a court order has never been absolute either, merely opportunistic. These are opportunities they don't have available to them, and it needs to stay that way. They should not be permitted to set aside all other concerns just to keep that wiretap and search ability in the cases where it comes up, because it simply isn't that important compared to all of the problems they will cause in the process. People, including whistleblowers and political dissidents, even in the U.S., will be harassed, threatened, blackmailed, or even killed as a result of their tampering, and the government itself will misuse those expanded access powers, just like all the others they've publicly or secretly obtained.

dogma1138 8y ago
>They can tap phones, and should be able to tap phones, along with VoIP, video calls, and mail. But while privacy isn't absolute, their ability to wiretap communications with a court order has never been absolute either, merely opportunistic. No it was never opportunistic, it was always by design and mandated by law as telecommunication providers must provide LEI capabilities this affects how they design and implement their networks and the equipment they use which is why LEI capabilities appear even in CPE equipment such as your modem and the FCC and other regulatory bodies enforce this as part of their certification process. The case here is that that now the telecommunication providers aren't actually that useful for LEI or at least it's that WhatsApp/Facebook isn't classified as one because if it was it would be required to provide LEI capabilities by law. >People, including whistleblowers and political dissidents, even in the U.S., will be harassed, threatened, blackmailed, or even killed as a result of their tampering, and the government itself will misuse those expanded access powers, just like all the others they've publicly or secretly obtained. If we turn back the clock even only 5 years ago where essentially nothing was encrypted in a manner that would invalidate LEI this wasn't an issue, nor does it grant the government any new powers.
guy98238710 8y ago
Perhaps such interception capabilities were developed because encryption technology wasn't widely available at the time. Even back then people with high security needs encrypted phone calls with contemporary encryption technology. Times have changed and encryption technology is widely available now. The question is whether encryption will be broken by people resisting change or whether law enforcement will be satisfied with metadata alone. EDIT: Should have been posted under grandparent.

dogma1138 8y ago

>They can tap phones, and should be able to tap phones, along with VoIP, video calls, and mail. But while privacy isn't absolute, their ability to wiretap communications with a court order has never been absolute either, merely opportunistic. No it was never opportunistic, it was always by design and mandated by law as telecommunication providers must provide LEI capabilities this affects how they design and implement their networks and the equipment they use which is why LEI capabilities appear even in CPE equipment such as your modem and the FCC and other regulatory bodies enforce this as part of their certification process. The case here is that that now the telecommunication providers aren't actually that useful for LEI or at least it's that WhatsApp/Facebook isn't classified as one because if it was it would be required to provide LEI capabilities by law. >People, including whistleblowers and political dissidents, even in the U.S., will be harassed, threatened, blackmailed, or even killed as a result of their tampering, and the government itself will misuse those expanded access powers, just like all the others they've publicly or secretly obtained. If we turn back the clock even only 5 years ago where essentially nothing was encrypted in a manner that would invalidate LEI this wasn't an issue, nor does it grant the government any new powers.

guy98238710 8y ago

Perhaps such interception capabilities were developed because encryption technology wasn't widely available at the time. Even back then people with high security needs encrypted phone calls with contemporary encryption technology. Times have changed and encryption technology is widely available now. The question is whether encryption will be broken by people resisting change or whether law enforcement will be satisfied with metadata alone. EDIT: Should have been posted under grandparent.