There is a new war on Encryption will. It will not work. But it can cause a lot of headaches and collateral damage, not to mention lost productivity hours trying to explain the basic techniques made politicans who are paid to do not understand.
In the early 190s, the first War on Encryption heated, and it was mainly on the PGP Phil Zimmermann - a utility that, for the first time, allowed ordinary people to encrypt their communications outside the reach of government. Consequently, governments immediately prohibit thing. The United States has classified as weapons-grade (yes, really), making it subject to very tight restrictions, and France did not care to justify why, but just banned outright.
It took a while to tinker with the source code, and stressing "if I can write this freely, then I can mathematics. If I can mathematics, so I can code. And if I can code, so I can encrypt "It took protracted legal battles (literally involved encryption source code printed on t-shirts as a political statement) in the courts have established that freedom of expression includes the freedom to code - . And these are historic decisions for civil liberties.
Today, we use encryption for everything. Including keep the government out of our lives. When we are not consciously (as the use of a VPN), others instruct our computer to do it for us (such as banks, Google and Facebook switched to an encrypted connection, even if you do not ask ). Governments are embarrassed by this. Again. Governments require "backdoors" in the encryption. Again. David Cameron, the British prime minister, went on a rampage demanding privacy for the British government, but not for someone else. Requiring rear doors to all encryption software used in UK borders, backdoors that only the government of the United Kingdom may use
This is not just total the highest technical debility level. It is a view completely backwards on the work they are doing very.
The officials work for the public. You can kind of understand that, in the title, and "servant" "public." This includes people throughout all levels of government, including the head of state.
The chances are that you are not allowed to hold the secrets of your boss on how you do your job, or does, everything about your work. There is no reason people who work for the public - and whose salary is paid by the public - should be treated differently. At the same time, these officials have the duty to respect the right to privacy for everyone. But through a number of coups, a couple of people very uninformed and lost in such positions - David Cameron included - have reversed it means the opposite
but he
ordinary citizens have the right to privacy. It is in the Declaration of the United Nations human rights, it is in the US bill of rights, it is in the European Convention on Human Rights, and elsewhere. The officials are responsible to those who pay their salaries for everything related to employment. This goes with the concept of a job
It seems that we have to face it all again, and governments will talk about the usual Horsemen of the Apocalypse -. drug barons, child abuse, organized crime and the sharing of common files - to try to justify the elimination of the fundamental freedom of privacy. (In doing so, they are subverting another principle, in passing, that the presumption of innocence: you can not justify a general intrusion into the private lives of everyone saying that there may be a criminal there somewhere you really need formal individual and suspicion)
there is nothing to say it will end in any other way than it did the last time. with thousands of hours of lost productivity trying to explain the most basic things to politicians who are paid not to understand, and with jurisdictions that govern much you are allowed to write code, while politicians sing on organized crime outside the courtroom and television cameras after.
Meanwhile, privacy remains your own responsibility.
0 Komentar