News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf] by JoshTriplett on Sunday November 08, 2020 @04:55PM (#25029452)
One of many angles is "perhaps you trust your government (or perhaps not), but do you trust every government with a backdoor? Do you trust everyone who has gotten hold of it? Do you trust that it can't be broken or stolen or abused?"

We need to very clearly and universally make the message clear: there's unbreakable encryption, and there's broken encryption, nothing in between. Anything that purports to be in between is either broken or soon will be.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf] by alkonaut on Sunday November 08, 2020 @05:12PM (#25029601)
I trust my current government, I don't trust most foreign ones and I don't even trust my own next government. I think we now have the two key pillars of the dilemma: we can never have back doors (broken encryption which is as bad as no encryption), and neither the public (I'm guessing) nor authorities will allow a situation where even a court order doesn't allow eavesdropping. And between these two there is no middle ground.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf] by sjy on Monday November 09, 2020 @07:31AM (#25034065)
Where do the existing "readily available, off-the-shelf encryption solutions" mentioned in the link fall in this dichotomy? Are they unbreakable because no network administrator can read my WhatsApp messages? Or are they broken, because Apple can push out an OS update and steal messages without the user knowing?
[ Parent | on HN ]