So? Cars also help the bad guys escape from robberies faster, but we don't seem to ban those...
Not to mention knives... those can be deadly if somebody stubs you with one.
And what about clothes? Naked criminals would be much less effective...
The thing is anything can assist criminals. Why single out encryption (besides the government wanting to snoop at will)?
Bad example. We definitely do ban carrying large knives (blade length >X), butterfly knives etc. around with you. Relatedly Germany even punishes carrying around lockpicking tools (unless that is your job) -- just carrying them.
A 5cm screwdriver is more than enough to give brain damage to someone.
A flexible extension hose like the ones that go under the sink (with the nuts attached) is perfect for knocking someone out.
A titanium tipped pen is quite good if you aim for ears, temple or throat.
A tightly rolled newspaper makes a very good blunt weapon.
Breaking/banning encryption like would have minimal benefits while exposing the whole society. Don't think that only the gov't will have the secondary keys if they decide to "only" have back doors. Anyone motivated enough will have them.
If chat encryption is banned... let's say it's not hard to reintroduce it on top of existing layers for anyone motivated enough or with enough money.
Whether the balance is good or bad, we will see. But society is all about balancing the good and the bad.
Which can only be done through spyware installed universally if encryption isn't going to be broken. Because that certainly isn't ripe for abuse..
That's why I can only see a plausible outcome involving radical reductions in penalties for basically everything.
There is no balanced middle with encryption. Things are either encrypted or their not.
"Encrypted but a third party has access" or "Encrypted, but with breakable encryption" is as good as non encrypted.
Yes, but the "bad" tends to become "good", as the members of the society becomes weaker and weaker.
My general point is that even though crypto is necessary (despite criminals using it), keeping it available isn't sufficient.
Indeed, food is also helpful to criminals, without proper nourishment they would be less capable
> No.
Without going into whatever context the original quote has: doch — encryption does both. There is no technology so pure it only helps the "good guys", from fire to firearms[0] there are things we can't possibly survive without, and yet criminals can use them for crimes.
I don't know the best way to handle this with crypto, mainly because the problem is much deeper than the crypto itself: even if absolutely everyone without exception or equivocation agrees everyone gets unbreakable cryptography, it is getting ever easier to just spy directly — laser microphones on drones, using software to repurpose a WiFi antenna as a wall-penetrating radar, IR cameras, using AI for gaze detection and 3D scene reconstruction to figure out who (or what) you were looking at when you blushed — that's all coming to a blackmailer near you. (Caveat: fake images and potentially at some point 3D bioprinted fake bodies will make the evidence invalid in courts of law, but that's a whole different discussion).
The only thing I can even think to suggest is a radical liberalisation of almost every law and punishment such that we can as a society survive when everyone's crimes, misdemeanours, and administrative infractions/regulatory offences are cataloged and dealt with in real time.
The only thing I am sure of is that the future can't look anything like the examples from history — while it might be much better or much worse, it won't be even close to the same.
[0] I don't mean in the American 2nd amendment sense though, I mean an army with no firearms will loose to one that has them.