3 ms·
I'm entirely against what the UK government wants, however I would say: Although you're right that tech people would still be able to choose secure encrypted o
by swores 2y ago
I'm entirely against what the UK government wants, however I would say:
Although you're right that tech people would still be able to choose secure encrypted options, the fact is that the majority of criminals by pure numbers are not very sophisticated - so while this sort of backdoor obviously wouldn't be a guarantee that every criminal conversation could be snooped on, it would work on the 90-99% (I'd guess towards 99) who aren't both cautious enough to try to be secure and tech savvy enough to make the right choices.
(But it's still a terrible idea, both for the sake of general privacy principles, and for the risk that current or future governments or personnel will abuse the access, and for the risk that criminals outside government will be able to take advantage of the same backdoor.)
- sejje 2y agoFor three whole minutes until everyone knows it's totally compromised and stops doing that
- swores 2y agoSMS is already known to be insecure and easily snooped on with a warrant, and has been used by police around the world in many cases, yet a surprisingly high number of criminals still use it.
- eapressoandcats 2y agoRealistically most criminals probably don’t even turn on ADP, so it will probably move the needle not at all.
- adim86 2y agoThe idea that criminals are not sophisticated is a weak excuse for this system. Once the government starts mining data from iPhones, criminals will quickly adapt while every law-abiding citizen gets caught in the crossfire. It opens the door for abuse: officials could easily spy on their partners, dig up dirt on rivals, or target those they dislike without breaking any laws. Meanwhile, cybercriminals will have an easy target since every phone comes with this built-in vulnerability. This system is likely to snag small-time offenders, not the real masterminds behind organized crime. This isn’t a smart solution for crime. It just sacrifices our privacy for a few token arrests.
- nottorp 2y agoCriminals don't need to be all sophisticated anyway. They just need to know how to reach one of the sophisticated criminals and pay them to extract whatever they need. Incidentally, as a non US and non UKer, my data with the major tech firms has no protection anyway. Welcome to the club, US citizens :)
- zombiwoof 2y agoVery weak considering we have a criminal in the White House
- watwut 2y agoHe is not sophisticated and did not needed to be sophisticated to be in the White House. And untouchable by the law.
- trinsic2 2y agoThere are already replies with sound arguments against the ideology that 90 of criminals arnt that sophisticated. Secondly, I will also point out that criminals in general watch whats happening to other criminals. If people start going to jail because there mobile communications are being targeted, others will catch on and stop using mobile tech altogether for criminal activities.. People copy what works successfully, you don't need to be smart to do that. So yeah this argument is complete bullshit.
- KennyBlanken 2y agoThe majority of criminals have no idea that their their iMessage encryption keys and iMessages are synced into the cloud and available to law enforcement with a warrant. No need to break devices security, no need for back doors.
- fakedang 2y agoMost GSW victims are killed by one or two bullets, not hundreds of them. You don't need a "vast majority" of criminals to break down a system and exfiltrate data when just a single, possibly state-backed, criminal operation can break your system down and do the job.