You must log in or register to comment.
It’s kind of integral to the function of enterprise?
The entire financial system literally relies on encryption
Lots of really critical stuff needs encryption, it’s absolutely insane to try and ban it.
People lock their doors; everyone understands.
wHaT aRe ThEy HiDiNg!!??!1?
It’s definitely not integral. You could just control the connection points. Ie, all your software tools on intranet and wired connection only. Any data can be decrypted.
No, you are wildly incorrect for multiple reasons both technical and practical.
I’m not even going to waste any more of my time pointing out how intensely ridiculous your assertions are.
Please tell me banking didnt exist before radio transmission.
Please continue to highlight your spectacular ignorance so that everyone knows for sure that you should not be taken seriously.
Everyone? You mean the 10 people that read this thread?
That’s correct, but your point is not clear. Public infrastructure is not a closed system. If your “closed systems” have to communicate, they either build and support their own parallel infrastructure or don’t, or communicate without encryption over public infrastructure. Which is not acceptable.
People used encryption for commercial purposes since Antiquity.
If your point is how it mostly was right “before radio transmission” - that latency would break civilization. You’d have to send messengers with safes for correspondence. The contents of which would be encrypted.
By the way, in those days nobody in their right mind would suggest banning encryption. If you need to read something - get a court order to read it first, if you read it without that you’ve committed a crime and it’s not admissible. If it’s encrypted, you could get the court to demand someone to decipher it, if it’s certain that they can.
A lot of steps, see, to not infringe on private life.
Encryption is only a crime if done by a poor or not the government. So long as it’s got the rich people backing it, it’s not even in the same league.
When will you people see that this world doesn’t have universal rules. It has rules for the poor. And those for the rich.
There’s a mass without roofs, a prison to fill
A country soul that reads post not bills
A strike, and a line of cops outside of the mill.
There is a right to obey, and the right to kill.
© Rage against the Machine
Encryption should be no more a crime than locking your house or storing your valuables in a safe.
Encryption is not just not a crime, it’s a republican virtue, those arguments usually used about guns, they are even better applicable to encryption. Encryption is actually a civil duty, because of herd immunity being damaged by people not using encryption. That public institutes’ erosion we are seeing in the last decades - it’s because the technological progress made the need for encryption to blow up, not accompanied with sufficient public perception. That erosion is a result of bad people having gotten orders of magnitude more information about everyone to plan their actions.
Yet.
It’s the Cypherpunk’s Manifesto all over again.
Encryption is not a crime *unless you’re doing it to someone else’s data to extort them for bitcoins
Who is the removed who would that encryption is a crime?
A fairly large portion of governments globally
They’ll just make it a crime and pretend you were wrong all along. We’re not playing by moral rules anymore.
Encryption is like a lock, it has keys. Its like saying “All of you should provide a print of all your keys used in your home to the police, else how would we know you are not hiding a body in there?”
I believe in some jurisdictions it is in some circumstances a crime, yes.
I think it’s contextual. It is definitely relevant to bring into a criminal case that criminals made attempts to obstruct gathering of evidence in commission of the crime. It’s no different than shredding or burning paper files. Evidence of criminals taking steps to hide the criminal activity is how you prove that a transgression is willful rather than negligent. That matters in cases like murder.
Encryption is also criminal in some contexts, like encrypted radio broadcasts on frequencies for public use.
It definitely belongs as a talking point in a courtroom, imo.
It’s no different than shredding or burning paper files.
Both are normal if you work with information you wouldn’t like to leak. Or something very personal.
They are that thing you said only if they are unusual for the circumstance. When that gives information that a person did something not normal.
Because that’s a sign of something, kinda similar to shaking hands and missing shovel and sudden lack of time for guests.
Encrypting everything on Internet-connected machines is not unusual. It’s perfectly normal. It’s f* obligatory.
Encryption is also criminal in some contexts, like encrypted radio broadcasts on frequencies for public use.
Because that’s almost jamming, if everyone could broadcast all they can, nobody could use those frequencies. And since you have to make space there, private transmissions probably belong somewhere else. Doesn’t matter when using wire. This is irrelevant to encryption.
It definitely belongs as a talking point in a courtroom, imo.
No it doesn’t. Even if someone suddenly started encrypting everything, no. Maybe they learned how the world works and decided to learn to do it just in case.
