1. So in case you haven’t been paying attention, there’s been a bit of a struggle going on between law enforcement and the tech industry over encryption. TL;DR: law enforcement doesn’t like it. The FBI even made a website:https://www.fbi.gov/services/operational-technology/going-dark …
-
-
12. The commission has to consider privacy and security. But that consideration is all they’re required to do. And even if they do recommend encryption: the AG can just override whatever they decide. And those problems are the tip of the iceberg. https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-ban-end-end-encryption-without-actually-banning-it …
Prikaži ovu nit -
13. This thread has been long and I want to end it on a different note. There are a number of thoughtful people, including notably
@alexstamos, who feel that tech providers need to work harder to find ways to square this circle: ie allow encryption and CSAM detection to co-exist.Prikaži ovu nit -
14. It is really hard for me to look at this kind of legislation (and the underlying, constantly shifting law enforcement strategy) and say “yes, these people are working with good intent to solve a problem, let’s make things easier for them.”
Prikaži ovu nit -
15. “Let’s build encryption systems that are somehow compatible with (currently well-intentioned) mass surveillance, and hand them over to politicians who have displayed no consistent principles in seeking this capability” does not feel like the winning move in this game. //END
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
"unelected commission"
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.