101–110 of 320 posts
France has rejected this backdoor but keep in mind that France is still in favor of chat control (mandatory on device scanning of your communication). There's now a majority among EU countries and the proposal is expected to pass. The next meeting is April 8th.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you say that when individuals are not allowed to show religious symbols or wear religious clothing in any government-affiliated setting? I don’t see how state-enforced irreligiousness (secularism/laicite) doesn’t completely contradict with individual freedoms.
Cela s'appelle la laïcité. If you have problems with that there are so many 3rd world countries that care about medieval stuff more than development. I think laïcité is one of the coolest words/concept, France should only really enforce it further.
If the general public is given a choice between super secret internet messaging, or the current status quo, they will go for the latter. This is because the former hampers law enforcement's ability to track down criminals and terrorists. And the better informed non-techies are about the tech, the more they will support backdoors. No large service will survive providing E2EE. In the near future, there is bound to be s…
Terrorists used planes as the key part of the attack in 9/11, and nobody called for a ban on all air travel. It’s not a forgone conclusion people will be fine keeping E2EE!
The backdoor mandate was part of an anti organized criminality law, Bruno Retailleau (interior minister) pretend criminals use encrypted chat to communicate and so backdoor is required to intercept their communications. makes sense to the average non tech people. The sad truth however is that it wouldn't even solve the issue, criminals will always be able to use encrypted communications: there are open source softwar…
While I generally agree with your position, this is the same unconvincing argument I've read for a long time. Even if there is a specific criminal gang that is sophisticated enough to use a properly encoded open source application, the majority aren't, and there is enough of a overhead and annoyance factor that will allow the majority not to use them. If any open source application gets enough people using it, there…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I haven't check other stats but what if your views on crime are being manipulated by people who have agenda that normally wouldn't be possible if the true reason was revealed? That is a known fact. Criminality rate drops but french people are feeling more and more insecure. There is a media oligarchy in France (by billionaires) that pushes anything but left ideas (the left want an exit tax and a wealth tax, the las…
[flagged]
There used to be a increase of crime but it was because of what the law counts as a crime. And no, non-lethal crime didn't increase so it is not about medicine that is getting better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the problem with backdoored encryption isn't making a cypher with multiple decryption keys. It's keeping secret that's worth billions of dollars and shared among 10s of thousands of people. The difference between backdoored encryption and no encryption is whether the backdoor is known to the public. There is a coherent set of values that lead to saying "no encryption", but not one for "only backdoored encryption".
> There is a coherent set of values that lead to saying "no encryption", but not one for "only backdoored encryption". While I oppose building backdoors, I don't really agree with this claim. There's nothing incoherent about developing a threat model.
Just like for other big challenges like biodiversity and climate change, it feels like it often boils down to the politicians just not understanding enough to take rational decisions. Of course they can't all have a PhD in cryptography, but they should also not have no clue at all. Over an over again, politicians are asking for backdoors. To me it just proves that they don't understand the very basic of how encryptio…
I would like to know what the public opinion on these issues is before blaming politician's ignorance, considering that to them the relevant knowledge is knowledge of what voters will support or tolerate. The impossible promise of backdoors that France can enter but no other country, organized criminal syndicate or petty government-employed stalker can find is only one impossible promise among the many we can hear fr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just like for other big challenges like biodiversity and climate change, it feels like it often boils down to the politicians just not understanding enough to take rational decisions. Of course they can't all have a PhD in cryptography, but they should also not have no clue at all. They would argue about the damages drugs do. I think they know what they are doing. Digital privacy has no lobby outside of EEF. We don…
The "war" on drugs is what brings all of the violence and crime associated with drugs, not the drugs themselves. But it finances the police industrial complex and so many people would lose out (or be forced to focus on actual crimes rather than people consensually trading plants or chemicals) that it will never happen.
Some of it, certainly, but I doubt it's all. Violence committed by druggies trying to scrape up enough for their next hit would still happen.
If the general public is given a choice between super secret internet messaging, or the current status quo, they will go for the latter. This is because the former hampers law enforcement's ability to track down criminals and terrorists. And the better informed non-techies are about the tech, the more they will support backdoors. No large service will survive providing E2EE. In the near future, there is bound to be s…
E2EE is very much in the interest of providers, because if their systems are breached in a cyberattack, E2EE is the only thing that stops that stolen data being useful. People can be educated about that. Terrorists used planes as the key part of the attack in 9/11, and nobody called for a ban on all air travel. It’s not a forgone conclusion people will be fine keeping E2EE!
The only benefit E2EE messaging offers the public over partially encrypted messaging is a lower chance of being spied upon. That's nice, but intangible.