|
|
|
|
|
|
by csandreasen
4280 days ago
|
|
|
The cops have a point. I don't think the actual encryption is as big a deal now as people are making it out to be, but Apple is setting a precedent when they say "we're doing this so we don't have to comply with warrants" instead of saying "we're doing this to make our customers safer". Apple just sparked a debate (as much as I hate that term). If the cops don't make a stink out of it now and point out the necessity of warrants, things may likely get out of hand somewhere down the road. |
|
|
1. Warrants have never been a guarantee of a search producing evidence.
2. It isn't Apple's data to hand over when a warrant is presented.
3. Making strong and deniable encryption illegal for some classes of users will make it highly desirable contraband.
4. Producing cyphertext complies with a warrant if that is all you can access.