It seems as though all the debates and analysis on this topic have already occurred. Yet, here we are again: a law enforcement agency demanding special privileged access to privately owned consumer electronics because it might contain useful crime fighting information.
It seems to me that the U.S. needs to have a broader discussion about what levels of government surveillance and intrusiveness into private lives we are comfortable with.
The outside threat of terrorism is now the club being wielded to force the issue, but is there really any evidence that this type of increased access helps? We had the Boston Marathon attack, in which two brothers immigrated from Chechnya, a known breeding ground for some of the most brutal terrorists in the world, the Russians actually phoned to warn us about them, and nothing was done.
Similarly, there was chatter in 2000-2001 about an attack involving passenger jets, reported by Israeli and German intelligence agencies. Yet, nothing was done. One would have thought it common sense to scrutinize foreign nationals, especially from Muslim countries with a lot of hostility toward the U.S. among the populace, who were involved in aviation. Reportedly, the Israelis even were monitoring a couple of the 9/11 hijackers in the U.S. at one point.
Should we not be streamlining our intelligence bureaucracies to avoid another Marathon fiasco, before sacrificing what little remains of our privacy on the altar of national security?
1. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/clipper-chips-birthday...