18 October 2014

Encryption backdoors and presumed innocence

FBI wants you to lock up data, but allow tech companies to keep the keys

I like and believe very much that we should have to obtain a warrant from an independent judge to be able to take the content of anyone's closet or their smart phone. The notion that someone would market a closet that could never be opened -- even if it involves a case involving a child kidnapper and a court order -- to me does not make any sense.

Yes, I am catching up on unfinished posts...

Flawed analogy. A closet and a data storage are very different things.

We are asked to trust companies and the government—and judges are part of the government—with back doors to get to our data because we might hide clues to illegal activities in that data.

That isn’t a valid justification in a society with presumed innocence.

Especially when you consider the breaches of trust from both companies and the government.

Can you commit a crime and the only evidence be encrypted data?

Even if you can, I’m not convinced that overrides the presumption of innocence.

1 comment:

KenHR said...

"That isn’t a valid justification in a society with presumed innocence."

This cannot be emphasized enough. People who consent to unwarranted surveillance because they claim to have done nothing wrong and therefore have nothing to worry about honestly frighten me. It's an inversion of rights as envisioned by the nation's founding fathers.