|
|
|
|
|
|
by andy_ppp
3753 days ago
|
|
|
If the government goes to a judge and gets a court order to access information this is what I consider reasonable and in fact a good thing! It seems to suggest that technical feasibility and cost needs to be taken into account as well. If it's technically impossible due to Spider Oak style end to end encryption or for example the new iPhones (6+6s) having some very advanced encryption features I'm not certain that there is a requirement to insert a backdoor. If the security services were monitoring a person who was genuinely planning to kill people and they asked you to put in a limited back door? Most services remember do not have encrypted backend systems and it'll probably always be this way. Mass surveillance is the complete opposite of this and is a totally unreasonable intrusion. |
|
|
Not to mention that the "someone planning to kill a bunch of people" scenario never actually happens. Typically these tools are used when prosecuting regular people for regular crimes, or looking for information after an attack has already happened (San Bernadino). Nobody has yet been able to point to a case of consequence where this type of surveillance was ever used for someone actively planning an attack.