|
|
|
|
|
by phkn1
3874 days ago
|
|
"American and French officials say there is still no definitive evidence to back up their presumption that the terrorists who massacred 129 people in Paris used new, difficult-to-crack encryption technologies to organize the plot." IMO, that is the only part of the article that needs to be understood. |
|
Second, what would you propose _if_ they are found to have used encryption to avoid detection, would that make a difference? Or do we come up with a better reason to exculpate encryption?
If encryption is not a bogey-thing, then it's irrelevant whether it was used or not. We don't need confirmation it was not used.