If we ban cars tomorrow society grinds to a halt, there will be mass starvation. If we ban e2e encryption in consumer products tomorrow nothing changes.
We lost that perception years ago when Snowden revealed it was all backdoored anyway. I do not know what rule of law you are referring to.
>If we ban cars tomorrow society grinds to a halt, there will be mass starvation. If we ban e2e encryption in consumer products tomorrow nothing changes.
I do not think anyone serious is referring to banning all cars period. The discussion is more like creating more spaces where large vehicles are de prioritized or not allowed and walking and bicycling are prioritized such that there is greatly reduced risk of being run over. Also included are probably returning cars to smaller sizes and to reduce the severity of injuries and increased visibility.
Banning e2e does change something. Maybe not visibly, and not exactly tomorrow, but it certainly enables and progresses the mission of those wanting to limit civil rights.
> I do not think anyone serious is referring to banning all cars period.
And in my view E2E encryption doesn't have to be banned outright, it just needs to be treated as the dangerous tool it is. Making it the default for all communication is like making tanks the standard mode of transportation. How about a encryption registry, like a gun registry?
SiValley is currently giving military grade tools too rapists and slavers and then saying that telling them to stop will result in 1984; I just don't buy it. As you pointed out, those in control in the US already have all the tools they need to destroy your life thanks to the Patriot Act and poor judicial enforcement(Stingrays), meanwhile technology has progressed in a way that makes a very marginalized group, poor young women, much more vulnerable. Instead of providing a tech solution for a tech problem, the call from the encryption community is to solve it with the same way we always have. Easy for some rich tech bro to say, but if encryption was really just a shitty tool, I don't think the US security apparatus would have invested so heavily in it.
Though I agree that even as a huge proponent of e2ee communication that is free of backdoors, in the grand scheme of things it is not that important to the lives of most people. It's mostly a concern for us nerds and has almost no impact in real life. Especially when you consider that communication has been subject to government oversight and surveillance even in democratic, free societies forever.
If anything, whats anormal and new for most "normies" is e2ee for personal communication. My mom actually found it funny/naive that I actually believed that governments just can't read some of my encrypted chats if they wanted to. She also didn't understand why such a thing would be allowed if it was possible.
"Perception of privacy", unless you know about an actual fault with the E2E of various platforms it is actual privacy. Unless of course your phone gets trojaned or something, which is of course an issue, but it is how an actual investigation should be done (judicially authorized)
But if you still believe no one has actual privacy then your protonmail account would be useless right?
As far as I'm concerned every cellular device is probably backdoored through the baseband, telecoms have long worked hand in hand with the USG, and the pressure that the US has put on allies to boycott Huwei RF hardware only strengthened that claim. If you are, say, a head of ISIS, my guess is that your phone already has keyloggers on it.
This whole conversation is a microcosm of US politics in that both sides are completely unwilling to compromise on their position.
Nothing is saying that you couldn't roll a "right to privacy" into legislation, say that anyone who provides a messaging system isn't allowed to analyze those messages, and any read/write action has to be instigated by or in service to either the user or a warrant. Add massive fines as a percent of revenue or significant prison time for violations. Wouldn't that be a win/win?
You could then treat E2E encryption like other military assets, civilians need to register and pass a background check. If you have a driver's license in the US you sign away your right to not take a drug test, similarly you could sign away your right not to tell law enforcement your password. Corporations could make being licensed for E2E a hiring bar just like military clearance.
All this is dependent on my (some might say naive) view that the US is ultimately a democracy(and has a strong history of it) and as a result is unlikely to go fully off the rails. I really don't worry about the USG snooping on me, (why would I? seriously) but I literally just last week heard about the young daughter of an acquaintance of an acquaintance getting kidnapped.
Yes, pretty much.
> The way the Russian invasion of Ukraine was so accurately telegraphed by the US was a demonstration to me of how powerful our intelligence apparatus is.
Nah, they just had people infiltrate telegram/whatsapp groups and get the info from there. Russian army discipline in that area is very poor. Then Ukraine tapped into their actual calls for later intelligence.
The baseband is actually the most unhelpful place to have any backdoor. But yes, if you're a high level target you're probably getting observed
But that doesn't mean people should actively try to undermine E2E (again, it's not just against the government. I'm happy to keep it secret end to end, including to my ISP, the people on the same VLAN as me, etc)
But I agree in some aspects that the right is not absolute. But I'm actually less worried with something like Pegasus than a blanket general weakening of privacy for everybody