4 ms·
Right here is another argument in favor of string privacy protection. Even if NSO was a righteous and holy actor (spoiler: it's not), they can be hacked any tim
by Shindi 5y ago
Right here is another argument in favor of string privacy protection. Even if NSO was a righteous and holy actor (spoiler: it's not), they can be hacked any time and now that data is public.
Same reason govts shouldn't spy on their citizens: even when you fully believe in your own govt, they can be hacked.
- Cthulhu_ 5y agoSame reason why encryption shouldn't be weakened or backdoored ("think of the children / terrorists!"); if there's a weakness or backdoor, someone that shouldn't will find and exploit it. Or it'll leak from the one point that can decrypt it.
- dwild 5y ago> Right here is another argument in favor of string privacy protection. Even if NSO was a righteous and holy actor (spoiler: it's not), they can be hacked any time and now that data is public. This doesn't show that we need strong privacy protection, this show that asking for privacy protection isn't enough and goes way beyond privacy protection. Even if you got GDPR in every first world country, NSO will still exist, intelligence gathering will still exist. Zerodium exist for god sake, it's a public facing company to buy zero days. Even if you got both them and NSO shut down, believe me, others companies will do the exact same, they'll just do it more secretly.