3 ms·
I can see how that is an issue, but I still think bringing the E2EE argument in here is completely beside the point, and I think your point here serves to illus
by jchw 3y ago
I can see how that is an issue, but I still think bringing the E2EE argument in here is completely beside the point, and I think your point here serves to illustrate that: if a private chat didn't contain potentially sensitive information, it wouldn't make it any more reasonable to argue against being able to encrypt it. It may very well be that what the NYPD is doing is ultimately the right way to go, but you can't get there by comparing it to the typical E2EE debate.
- giantg2 3y agoI'm not comparing it to E2EE. I'm stating there is personal information in the messages. The subject doesn't have a choice to how that information is transmitted or protected. There should be a duty for the government to protect that person's info if they have the power to force the person to disclose it. Most recording are not by default public record either. Oftentimes it needs to be censored before being released to protect sensitive information, like subject addresses, license numbers, etc.