3 ms·
James Comey once expressed his opinion that there are two sides to the encryption debate, privacy and the ability of law enforcement to obtain information. Both
by Buttons840 4y ago
James Comey once expressed his opinion that there are two sides to the encryption debate, privacy and the ability of law enforcement to obtain information. Both sides are important, and he never made up his mind on what the right balance should be. Now his time to influence such things is past.
Reading this, I knew he was right, but formed my own opinion that math and reality should decide that balance. Math has spoken, and it is in favor of encryption. The day may come when the pendulum swings back and a way is revealed to break all forms of encryption, if that is the case, then so be it, then and now doing math should remain legal.
(Not exactly a fresh idea, but I wanted to write it.)
- lern_too_spel 4y agoDoing math always has been and always will be legal. It also always has been and always will be legal for a judge to compel you to show your work.
- lliamander 4y agoMaking it necessary for a judge to order you to hand over your encryption keys is better than the alternative.
- formerly_proven 4y agoBarely, stuff like this tends to get unread-rubberstamped. Arguably, that's worse than giving the executive overreaching privileges (which can be openly challenged), because it creates the illusion of judicial oversight.
- samuel 4y agoMath enables encryption but by itself doesn't encrypt. Software does.