3 ms·
I don't think OP meant to imply that backdoors had anything to do with this. It's meant to underscore the argument against backdooring encryption by pointing o
by hamburglar 6y ago
I don't think OP meant to imply that backdoors had anything to do with this. It's meant to underscore the argument against backdooring encryption by pointing out that when you trust some entity with a backdoor, you're potentially opening that backdoor to anyone who can break that entity's security, which may be very, very flawed.
- all_blue_chucks 6y agoThat's unrelated to backdoors (deliberate covert access mechanisms). All parties with access to data, regardless of whether it is via a backdoor, can put that data at risk due to their own security.
- hamburglar 6y agoThis is only unrelated if you don't consider government-mandated master key escrow a "backdoor," which seems deliberately obtuse to me. Regardless, the OP's point was that this is an additional argument against governments mandating a way to access your encrypted data, because you shouldn't be compelled to trust anyone else with a "don't worry, only we will have access" sort of system.