Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 299 posts

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#101

Post by [deleted] »

apatters wrote: post #94
killjoywashere wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A nice example of the complexity in this space: the Ben Franklin quote "those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" means something rather different when taken in context (1). (1) https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famou...

Not really. While that specific quote wasn't about surveillance, Franklin was decidedly pro-encryption, as were most of the Founding Fathers. They all "encrypted" their letters regularly with elaborate codes and ciphers to thwart surveillance by colonial authorities. The Revolution probably would have been impossible without it. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/h3ll0-mr...

[deleted]

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#102

Post by scotty79 »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #97
scotty79 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would argue these days that it is far better to be able to reconstruct a conversation and prove someone said something. In case things go wrong, we have to have a way to establish truth, and prove things, so we can have fairness in outcomes. I'd love to have that capability. What matters is who controls it. If everything about me was constantly recorded but I was the person that decides if and when make some of t…

If you love that capability, good for you. But leave it out for the others, live and let live.

Sure. I wouldn't mandate it. There would be no incentive to mandate it, when the owner remains in legal, practical control all the time, even in court.

I think most of us would still use it. To record our lives so you can review or share the good parts or prove something you said, heard or seen. It's already happening with phones (they just don't record all the time but that's mostly to technical limitations) and I think people today would love to be able to get easy, legal access to footage containing them from other sources.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#103

Post by jacquesm »

Freak_NL wrote: post #100
jacquesm wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but you can order physical abuse over the internet. I really don't want to bother you with how dark some of the darker stuff on the internet is but you're going to have to trust me on this without having to become more explicit or you risk losing your breakfast and then some. The digital can definitely be a pre-cursor and active element in the physical.

Sure, but then we're not talking about the vast majority of digital transgressions are we? That is, the simple (re)distribution of child pornography — ghastly enough as that is — not the few who actively seek out and order new abusive material from those who actually produce the stuff. This debate is about proportionality. How many children can live a marginally better live by giving up strong encryption and privacy…

I'm not at all trying to pull this into the 'think of the children' domain, I'm just pointing out that what you think is going on is probably not nearly as bad as what is really going on. It goes a lot further than just child pornography, think snuff movies involving children made to order and other 'creative' idiocy.

I'm all for people having access to encryption, I'm also for stamping out these criminals. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#104

Post by concordDance »

jacquesm wrote: post #88
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't physically abuse over the internet though, that's my point and that's why I separated the two concepts of "removing content from the Internet" and "Protecting children from harm". The digital is an after-effect of the physical.

No, but you can order physical abuse over the internet. I really don't want to bother you with how dark some of the darker stuff on the internet is but you're going to have to trust me on this without having to become more explicit or you risk losing your breakfast and then some. The digital can definitely be a pre-cursor and active element in the physical.

> No, but you can order physical abuse over the internet

Is this actually taking place at a non-negligible scale?

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#105

Post by qwerty456127 »

Every time somebody tries to exploit the children protection narrative to justify a privacy/freedom withdrawal it's a huge red flag.

E.g. at the time when the government was introducing the websites blocking system in Russia they spoke about blocking underage porn but as soon as the system was deployed they started to block whatever sites they dislike (for political reasons or for money) every day.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#106

Post by AdrianB1 »

Iv wrote: post #93

Fight against pedophilia has always been one of the common excuses (the other being terrorism) used to install spying devices everywhere, even despite very few actual organizations that fight the problem actually asking for such things. I would be sad to hear that it would indeed be a useful tool, because the behavior of western government in the last 20 years at least makes it impossible to trust them on that one.

There is a huge part of the public that does not understand the implications of encryption, but they are moved by any mention of fighting against evil (and pedophilia is a scare for most) and these people have the right to vote. With enough propaganda, they would vote happily on anything, so this particular one is an easy one.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#108

Post by StanislavPetrov »

RHSeeger wrote: post #5

> The international police organization Interpol plans to condemn the spread of strong encryption in a statement Monday saying it protects child sex predators, three people briefed on the matter told Reuters. Let me fix that for you > it protects nearly every single person on the planet.

If nobody had any freedom at all there would be absolutely no "crime". If everyone was locked in their own individual cells 24/7 there would be no "predators". Fortunately, for now, most people (unlike you) reject the idea of giving up our freedom so that all of our actions can be controlled and monitored by the police state just because an infinitely tiny percentage of the people do bad things.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#109

Post by AdrianB1 »

Gatsky wrote: post #29

Lots of criticism here, fair enough, it’s very worrying to give non-transparent institutions this kind of power, not to mention the technical feasibility. But... what should be done about child pornography, then? The ability to disseminate it with impunity is a problem we can’t just pretend doesn’t exist. Using online platforms pedophiles can monetize and go full time professional in countries where children are easi…

You are manipulating: if there is a problem and the solution that is proposed is excessive, rejecting the proposed solutions does not move the burden of finding a solutions on the people rejecting it. For example, I propose to stop everyone from breathing, it will stop pedophiles; if you don't agree, you have to provide a solution for pedophilia. Not a logically sound argument, is it?

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#110

Post by Gatsky »

pixelpoet wrote: post #31
Gatsky wrote: post #29

Lots of criticism here, fair enough, it’s very worrying to give non-transparent institutions this kind of power, not to mention the technical feasibility. But... what should be done about child pornography, then? The ability to disseminate it with impunity is a problem we can’t just pretend doesn’t exist. Using online platforms pedophiles can monetize and go full time professional in countries where children are easi…

If we're going to throw out anything and everything to win that unwinnable battle, first goes encryption, then cameras, then computers, and then finally all humans after puberty. Obviously there must be some reasonable limit, and making all encryption illegal (or just for civilians, and then shady stuff will start happening under govt and corporate encryption) is truly throwing the baby out with the bathwater, in tha…

Yes I agree with you. But at the same time, I don’t feel comfortable knowing what is going on and just accepting that it is a cost of liberty. We are talking about the worst, most harmful most exploitative human behaviour that destroys lives. If we can’t introduce some nuance and proportionality here then well I think we are doomed.

Guns aren’t a good example... I mean guns are regulated? There isn’t total liberty there.

Post reply on HN