4 ms·

The end doesn't justify the means. Police in democratic societies have less power on what they are allowed to do in order to stop crimes, uncover crimes or pros

The end doesn't justify the means. Police in democratic societies have less power on what they are allowed to do in order to stop crimes, uncover crimes or prosecute criminals. Like requiring a search warrant or how long the police can hold you, interrogate you and so forth. But speech in general has always been a private matter, encryption only reinforces the status quo of society. What argument do you have that less encryption is the preferred solution?

azinman2 5y ago
I have family members that have gone through violent crime that now have PTSD, and due to lack of evidence because of the inability to read chat logs, the perpetrator is free and the case never brought against him. Meanwhile Encrochat's non-encryption ended up allowing a multinational set of drug cartels to be taken down. It's not difficult to come up with such examples.
- nobody9999 5y ago
  I have sympathy for your family members. I (obviously) have no idea about the details of that situation, but since a violent crime can't be committed over the internet via a chat app, there ought to be physical evidence of that crime, no? If there's some sort of conspiracy element to that, I can see how chat logs might be useful. But attempting to require folks to provide information they don't have (as is the case here) is a fruitless endeavor. What solution would you suggest? Get rid of encryption? Force providers to collect the contents of their users' computers and phones? While, as I said, I sympathize with your family members (and you), such an outcome doesn't justify taking away everyone's privacy. Especially since the vast majority of people are decent, law-abiding folks. I get that your experiences and the pain they've caused won't allow you to see things differently, but privacy is important, and I for one, won't give mine up without a fight.
- Out_of_Characte 5y ago
  I dont wish to come off as unsympathetic because no one should have to experience violent crime. But dont you consider the danger of weakening encryption through law? Facebook and google are giants that have earned all their money because they are able to read everything people say on their platforms in plaintext. Once you weaken encryption for police, you weaken it for everyone with a motive like the police or the state.

azinman2 5y ago

I have family members that have gone through violent crime that now have PTSD, and due to lack of evidence because of the inability to read chat logs, the perpetrator is free and the case never brought against him. Meanwhile Encrochat's non-encryption ended up allowing a multinational set of drug cartels to be taken down. It's not difficult to come up with such examples.

nobody9999 5y ago
I have sympathy for your family members. I (obviously) have no idea about the details of that situation, but since a violent crime can't be committed over the internet via a chat app, there ought to be physical evidence of that crime, no? If there's some sort of conspiracy element to that, I can see how chat logs might be useful. But attempting to require folks to provide information they don't have (as is the case here) is a fruitless endeavor. What solution would you suggest? Get rid of encryption? Force providers to collect the contents of their users' computers and phones? While, as I said, I sympathize with your family members (and you), such an outcome doesn't justify taking away everyone's privacy. Especially since the vast majority of people are decent, law-abiding folks. I get that your experiences and the pain they've caused won't allow you to see things differently, but privacy is important, and I for one, won't give mine up without a fight.
Out_of_Characte 5y ago
I dont wish to come off as unsympathetic because no one should have to experience violent crime. But dont you consider the danger of weakening encryption through law? Facebook and google are giants that have earned all their money because they are able to read everything people say on their platforms in plaintext. Once you weaken encryption for police, you weaken it for everyone with a motive like the police or the state.