[DrScientist]

That wasn't my point. The point is such a back-door doesn't necessarily enable dragnet surveillance - of the kind that,for example, Snowdon revealed the US government was doing.

There is a big difference in my view between court authorized search warrants ( in effect ), and blanket surveillance.

Can authorities abuse the former? Sure - but on the other hand it's hard to argue that authorities should have no powers at all to perform searches if they make the appropriate case to the courts.

[shaftway]

They've already demonstrated that they're willing to use secret courts and gag orders to prevent Apple from disclosing what they're doing (referenced in the article). How would you know if they're abusing it?

[DrScientist]

If there were abusing it large scale, I still think it would come out ( cf Snowdon ) - the more people are involved, the more likely something is to leak.

ie in terms of conspiracy theories - those that involve large numbers of people being in the know, but nothing leaking, are the most unlikely.

However I totally agree that the recent trend towards secret courts, the attempts to remove access to a jury of your peers, and the creeping abuse of terrorism legalisation is both wrong and worrying.

However that's kind of my point - the existence of state powers of search isn't the issue, the issue is whether they are under proper control. The issue isn't whether the government can see the stuff I have with Apple, it's what's the process to allow that to happen.