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

71–80 of 299 posts

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#71

Post by GoblinSlayer »

goblin89 wrote: post #21
noobermin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is close to saying child rapists rape children behind closed doors so you shouldn't have locks, ignoring that well locked doors benefit everyone who has a house. It's disingenuous.

While I support the sentiment that privacy is important, comparing encryption to locks in this ghastly context is self-defeating. Recall that there were more than one instance where critical evidence against a wealthy person, required for the prosecution to make a compelling case in court, was obtained by force with a police raid. At least one such instance happened in the US in 2019 and was well-publicized. Now imag…

Encryption doesn't prevent police raids.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#72

Post by jacquesm »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #26
snowwrestler wrote: post #8

This is a good time to remember that police forces work for governments and not the other way around. Of course it would be easier for the police to catch bad guys if they had full-text search access to all conversations and content, worldwide. That doesn’t mean it is a good idea. They’re asking for something to make their job easier... can’t blame them for trying, and of course who doesn’t want to catch people who h…

Child protection should be treated much more as a "local" than "global" issue. If it's "scale" they want, to really protect children, then local boots on the ground is still the best defense. Rather than talking about encryption, Interpol should be espousing the benefits of local investigation and intervention based on mandatory reporting. Removing child abuse content from the Internet is a digital issue. Protecting…

> Child protection should be treated much more as a "local" than "global" issue.

That, unfortunately, is no longer an option. Pedophile rings including the content producers have realized long ago that going international gives them an extra layer of protection.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#73

Post by n0rbwah »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #26
snowwrestler wrote: post #8

This is a good time to remember that police forces work for governments and not the other way around. Of course it would be easier for the police to catch bad guys if they had full-text search access to all conversations and content, worldwide. That doesn’t mean it is a good idea. They’re asking for something to make their job easier... can’t blame them for trying, and of course who doesn’t want to catch people who h…

Child protection should be treated much more as a "local" than "global" issue. If it's "scale" they want, to really protect children, then local boots on the ground is still the best defense. Rather than talking about encryption, Interpol should be espousing the benefits of local investigation and intervention based on mandatory reporting. Removing child abuse content from the Internet is a digital issue. Protecting…

Yes, giving access to all communications worldwide to the cops still won't help them catch the abusers that don't record and post their abuse online. Which I assume is the majority of child abuse cases.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#74

Post by jacquesm »

GordonS wrote: post #49
m0dest wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’d probably be some new PKI on top of SSH where your private key would be held in escrow by an identity provider. e.g. Your username is your email address, and your email provider retains your key pair. It’d probably be portrayed as an improved key management solution that allows more frequent key rotations and revocations. Might even start with being required for government projects, resulting in supported impleme…

Forced key escrow was actually floated before, when I was a kid in the late 80's/early 90's. Even as a child it seemed like a terrible, dangerous idea.

That's the epitome of the 'what could possibly go wrong' meme.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#75

Post by x220 »

EGreg wrote: post #20
snowwrestler wrote: post #8

This is a good time to remember that police forces work for governments and not the other way around. Of course it would be easier for the police to catch bad guys if they had full-text search access to all conversations and content, worldwide. That doesn’t mean it is a good idea. They’re asking for something to make their job easier... can’t blame them for trying, and of course who doesn’t want to catch people who h…

Many years of reading on HN, I used to just accept that encryption is the best thing. And from a point of view of what will happen, that’s what will happen. But should we as a society want this? 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 fai…

We'll get rid of encryption when China and the rest of the countries in the world stop abusing human rights. Until that happens, shut up about this nonsense. It's much like telling us to disband the police because everyone should just get along and be peaceful all on their own.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#77

Post by x220 »

newguy1234 wrote: post #59
skokage wrote: post #51

Any time these topics around weakening privacy or removing encryption comes up, it's nearly always presented with a save the children type of argument. I mean, who doesn't want to protect children from child abuse and predators? The problem however, is that most children that are abused are done so by family members or people already close to them (like maybe their priests), so with that in mind I don't really unders…

That's because there is a deeper agenda than just "protecting children". If you read the Edward Snowden book (permanent record) then you'll note that he talks about what the NSA/CIA is actually doing with their signals intelligence programs. It isn't about national security, it is about espionage on a global scale. They want information on what foreign governments, journalists, domestic organizations (not just terror…

>hence the reason they mention national security. Of course, you can't just come out and say this is the reason so they mask it in "fighting sexual exploitation"

And then all the intelligence employees come on HNews after 5 PM and bitch and moan about how we don't trust their agency's reports about its own conduct and activities...

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#78

Post by x220 »

GordonS wrote: post #49
m0dest wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’d probably be some new PKI on top of SSH where your private key would be held in escrow by an identity provider. e.g. Your username is your email address, and your email provider retains your key pair. It’d probably be portrayed as an improved key management solution that allows more frequent key rotations and revocations. Might even start with being required for government projects, resulting in supported impleme…

Forced key escrow was actually floated before, when I was a kid in the late 80's/early 90's. Even as a child it seemed like a terrible, dangerous idea.

But think of the children! Do you want to help the terrorists? What's so bad that you want to hide it?

America is looking more and more like a Soviet style dictatorship every day. The United States' propaganda machine is so well tuned that they don't need to physically oppress us with secret police on every block. We oppress ourselves.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#79

Post by BLKNSLVR »

jacquesm wrote: post #72
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Child protection should be treated much more as a "local" than "global" issue. If it's "scale" they want, to really protect children, then local boots on the ground is still the best defense. Rather than talking about encryption, Interpol should be espousing the benefits of local investigation and intervention based on mandatory reporting. Removing child abuse content from the Internet is a digital issue. Protecting…

> Child protection should be treated much more as a "local" than "global" issue. That, unfortunately, is no longer an option. Pedophile rings including the content producers have realized long ago that going international gives them an extra layer of protection.

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.

Re: Interpol plans to condemn encryption spread, citing predators

#80

Post by matheusmoreira »

skokage wrote: post #51

Any time these topics around weakening privacy or removing encryption comes up, it's nearly always presented with a save the children type of argument. I mean, who doesn't want to protect children from child abuse and predators? The problem however, is that most children that are abused are done so by family members or people already close to them (like maybe their priests), so with that in mind I don't really unders…

It's framed as child protection precisely because it shuts down any debate on the matter. Everyone sees through the terrorists excuse but child exploitation causes such rage in the population they agree to anything the government says will make it stop. Discussion of any news related to this child abuse will pretty much always be full of people advocating for execution, torture and rape for the perpetrators. Encryption is nothing to these folks.

The reality is encryption regulation will be a tool for governors to secure their own power. They will abuse the insecurity to spy on political opposition, whistleblowers, journalists, protesters, even their own significant others. Child molesters are actually a low priority target for them, just a convenient enemy for the public to rally against. However, arguing against laws that are said to protect children is political suicide because they just label the opposition as pedophiles and enablers.

Children are the perfect political weapon. Any law can be justified by saying it's to protect children. They aren't even using terrorists as an excuse anymore.

Post reply on HN