This made me smile ...
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
I believe strongly that the law needs to be enforced (as long as those laws are just and reasonable). If the law enforcement agencies have a reasonable suspicion that a specific individual is involved in criminal activity, and they can obtain a court order permitting them to search their device(s), then I think it is right that individuals should be punished, if they don't comply with a court order. In exactly the same way as a court order to search someone's home or office.
But, it makes me happy that they are having a hard time arbitrarily breaking into electronic devices without their users' consent. If they want to access my private data, they should have reasonable suspicion that I am committing a crime and they should have to legally compel me to give my consent, via a court order, in order to access it.
Damn, this keeps on happening. And it seems there's no way I can edit the original post ... link:
"The FBI is not looking for a "back door" that would allow agents to obtain the contents of those messages secretly, he said. Instead, law enforcement wants the app developers to obtain the information when presented with a court order. "
*bangs head on desk"
Yes, yes they are. It's not secure if you're (front door) not the only one with the decryption key/pass/code/biometrics. Dummies. A back door = someone else has the key in addition to, other than, you.
Right, exactly. That statement is the equivalent of saying that they want front door lock manufacturers to give them a skeleton key to someone's house, if they ask for it. Why should data that is stored on my electronic device have any different legal status than data that is stored in a paper file in my home?
They're just fricking lazy and want to make their jobs easier ... (at the expense of my privacy)
Well said! They don't want the back door, they want the master and only key that fits in all doors. It could be laziness, or a strategic attempt at trying to gain abilities while the laws are not yet clearly defined, in hope of setting precedent to lobby for laws that favour them at the expense of citizens.
Remember when freedom and rights were the basis of our demographic societies, and not this constant internal battle to undermine them? We are our own terrorists and the wars we fought are losing their value.
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Walt Kelly, 1970
Threats to freedom are amplified by efficiency. While police can and do search the homes of innocent people, it takes time and resources, and it is done visibly. Abuses of this power are obvious, and while they can often get away with it anyway, they are incentived to avoid it. A mechanism for obtaining peoples passwords could be used instantaneously and without the individual's knowledge, making it trivial to abuse this power. This is a greater threat to society than the crimes that police are tasked to prevent, so there is no justification for it. Let's avoid placing our privacy in the hands of companies who may disagree.
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios