On 18/02/2016 11:30, douglas rankine wrote:
see url: http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2016-February/028156.html..sop long as you jump when we say jump.lol
and url: https://cryptome.org/2016/02/apple-018.pdf
Interesting conumdrum. If there is a complete and absolute end to end encryption capability introduced on a mobile phone, which cannot be broken or backdoored, (if such a thing were possible) then should the company introducing such a system be allowed to introduce it by the law of the national state concerned. If an individual manages to do it, should they be forced to reveal the password under the threat of criminal proceedings. In other words a legal back door. After all, we must catch these darn terrorists and criminals.
Or is privacy of communications more important than the secrecy of communications.
In the UK, the problem has been overcome by government legislation...one just requests the password holder to provide the key via the serving of a warrant...and if they don't provide access to decryption they go to prison and/or get fined...even if they have genuinely forgotten it or lost it. What happens if they still can't decrypt it...no one knows, a longer incarceration than the maximum legislated for the alleged crime for which proof is required for its breach? Still, our government wants to become like the Americans and get rid of international human rights, conventions and courts....too many prisoners and criminals get relief using it...the human rights of the people can be perfectly adequately looked after by domestic legislation and the constitution...under the slogan Trust us...put yourselves in our hands and we will keep you safe from the bad guys.