Suzanimal
05-01-2015, 04:57 AM
Government debate over encryption has veered into fully stupid territory. Expert testimony at a Congressional hearing on encryption blamed Apple and Google’s privacy systems for allowing perverts to get away with secretly photographing vaginas and posting the pictures online.
When Apple and Google debuted bulked-up encryption for websites last year, the FBI complained that this automatic encryption would be a boon for criminals. The DOJ insisted that it could kill a child! Today’s testimony, meant to help the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform assess encryption, chugged along a similarly twisty train of thought. This time, encryption critics trotted out child molester and freaky panty pervert doomsday scenarios to support the argument that people should not be able to secure their phones.
District Attorney David Conley warned that encryption will enable people taking “upskirt” photos to get away with posting surreptitious crotch shots. In the same testimony, Conley blamed encryption for potentially destroying cases against child abusers and people who pimp out children for sex.
Of course, the idea that encryption makes it harder to collect evidence is true. However, there are many salient reasons why people want to use encryption, just as there are many reasons people put locks on their doors. It’s a digital safeguard that protects us from criminals, snoops, creeps, and undue government surveillance.
Yes, of course, if police get a warrant, they can search a house or a closet or an iPhone in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. That doesn’t mean a suspect has to unlock their doors for the police — or their phones. It doesn’t mean we should build cars without locks to make it easier for police to search them.
...
http://gizmodo.com/today-in-congress-we-heard-that-encryption-is-enabling-1701050042
When Apple and Google debuted bulked-up encryption for websites last year, the FBI complained that this automatic encryption would be a boon for criminals. The DOJ insisted that it could kill a child! Today’s testimony, meant to help the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform assess encryption, chugged along a similarly twisty train of thought. This time, encryption critics trotted out child molester and freaky panty pervert doomsday scenarios to support the argument that people should not be able to secure their phones.
District Attorney David Conley warned that encryption will enable people taking “upskirt” photos to get away with posting surreptitious crotch shots. In the same testimony, Conley blamed encryption for potentially destroying cases against child abusers and people who pimp out children for sex.
Of course, the idea that encryption makes it harder to collect evidence is true. However, there are many salient reasons why people want to use encryption, just as there are many reasons people put locks on their doors. It’s a digital safeguard that protects us from criminals, snoops, creeps, and undue government surveillance.
Yes, of course, if police get a warrant, they can search a house or a closet or an iPhone in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. That doesn’t mean a suspect has to unlock their doors for the police — or their phones. It doesn’t mean we should build cars without locks to make it easier for police to search them.
...
http://gizmodo.com/today-in-congress-we-heard-that-encryption-is-enabling-1701050042