UK forces Apple to provide encrypted data to security agencies—is America next?
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 124 users / day
- 1.05K users / week
- 1.3K users / month
- 4.58K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3.55K Posts
- 89.7K Comments
- Modlog
The laws don’t exist though because they’re so easily circumvented. If you AES256 encrypt something today, there’s an extremely lonely chance they can’t crack it. For years.
With a padlock they can just pull out the cutters and they’re done.
I’m just referring to your point on why there are no laws against padlocks in this context.
fair enough, padlock was the wrong type of lock for the analogy. how about a vault door? sure that may not be as common, but you don’t have to support a government master key for those either.
Same thing goes for vaults, or all physical locks. It may take a little longer than a padlock but nothing comparable to the amount of time it would take to brute force good encryption. We’re talking maybe a couple of hours or days for a vault vs. millions of years.
so? does the quality of my lock change whether or not I should be allowed to have it?