4 ms·
"Federal prosecutors argue that not allowing the government access to encrypted computers would make it impossible to prosecute crimes such as terrorism, child
by zalew 15y ago
"Federal prosecutors argue that not allowing the government access to encrypted computers would make it impossible to prosecute crimes such as terrorism, child exploitation and drug trafficking"
good old 'think of the children'
- refurb 15y agoWhat I find annoying is the use of the word "impossible". Really? If everyone used encryption, the number of successful prosecutions of these crimes would drop to zero?
- zalew 15y agoWe should ask if before everyone had a laptop, and before those laptops were encrypted, haven't those crimes existed and be prosecuted in the first place?
- superppl 15y agoThat line just bugs me on so many levels. Why can't they prosecute those cases without having the data on someone's laptop? What can someone have on a laptop that can be so important that without it it becomes impossible to convince a jury? Honestly, I think if the prosecution is unable to move forward without that data, then they had no hope in the first place.
- whyenot 15y agoWouldn't an obvious case be possession of child pornography?
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- ceol 15y agoI disagree. In cases of fraud, logs, emails, and spreadsheets could all be used to guarantee a case— especially if it's the online variety. From my understanding, you're basically asking for the prosecution to prosecute a murder case but not allow them to use the murder weapon— with the person's prints on it— as evidence.