3 ms·
The scenario you described accomplishes both goals. By banning 'the masses' from using encrypted communications, it'll sort the haystack and everyone who conti
by awakeasleep 7y ago
The scenario you described accomplishes both goals.
By banning 'the masses' from using encrypted communications, it'll sort the haystack and everyone who continues to do so can be profiled, plus they're already involved in illegal behavior.
- adamc 7y agoHow so? Couldn't we come up with a way of disguising encrpyted message streams so that they did not stand out? It would be more expensive, and given enough analysis they could probably detect them anyway, but it strikes me as an arms race.
- dewaine 7y agoYou better believe I would start streaming random data all over the internet just to be an asshole
- inetknght 7y agoThen, in the US, you have obstruction of justice and/or interference with police/peace/public officer.
- dewaine 7y agoI think it's more of a protest, or am I not allowed to email myself numbers?
- inetknght 7y agoYou are, up until the point where it's cost a law enforcement officer time to determine that either the numbers are intended to waste their time or that the numbers are a hidden/unbackdoored encryption. Then you're GG SOL
- dewaine 7y agoYou literally cannot prove it either way, you can't prove it's not enciphered data, you can't prove it's not random garbage, that's the point. You can say that 'we could develop a safe backdoored system that will allow only lawful decryption in the event of emergency' in the same way you can say 'we can launch probes made of candy to distant planets that will build cities and plant potatoes for us'. It's a fantasy. The keys will leak, criminals etc will still blend into the crowd.