A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by aero142 on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @03:39PM (#10590588)

"When nuclear bombs are illegal, only the criminals will have nuclear bombs."

I think your grand unifying theory needs more nuance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by coldtea on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @03:45PM (#10590611)

I hope we don't depend on the unavailability of nuclear bombs to the bad guys on them being "illegal".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by aninhumer on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @04:36PM (#10590918)

No, we depend on the enforcement of that illegality, which is usually assumed when people discuss banning something.

(EDIT: Previously said "making something illegal", which I realised was ambiguous.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by marcosdumay on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @05:03PM (#10591101)

What, do you plan to make talking about crypto illegal too?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by aninhumer on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @05:21PM (#10591195)

I was replying to the general sentiment, not the specific.

Obviously banning encryption is ridiculous, but the "Only criminals will have X" argument is just silly rhetoric.

EDIT: I just noticed the ambiguity you're more likely responding to in my original post. I'll reword it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Back Door to Encryption Won't Stop Terrorists by Quinner on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @06:05PM (#10591400)

I think your nit-picking needs more thought, nuclear bombs are illegal for an individual to possess, and if someone had managed to obtain a bomb from say the former USSR, they would most definitely be considered a criminal.

[ Parent | on HN ]