|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Living with the surveillance state

Living with the surveillance state

Posted Oct 30, 2013 15:04 UTC (Wed) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198)
In reply to: Living with the surveillance state by NAR
Parent article: Living with the surveillance state

> if we accept that some surveillance is reasonable, the government will want to have a backdoor

I think we should accept that some is reasonable but only with heavy public oversight, not in secret, that is what the whole concept of warrants is trying to achieve. Any kind of government intervention or surveillance should be done in the open as a matter of public record so that we can independently scrutinize it's justification and methods.

I don't think that should require devices or services to have a backdoor, there is no requirement to make it easy or convenient to perform surveillance, I think it should be exactly the opposite. I would prefer data retention rules to prevent service providers from storing un-redacted logs and encourage them to design systems where they don't have the capability to access private keys and decrypt customer data. Safety mechanisms which protect against insider attack or data breaches should also protect against lawful surveillance.

You can still search a persons stuff with a warrant, you can still follow them around with a microphone to see who they communicate with, without jimmying all the worlds technology with backdoors.


to post comments


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds