- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 08:16:16 +0000
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CAHBU6is_KHGHTDeh31vZCVGZtQpuqNQr5NJtsGfsQ7As2G3jRw@mail.gmail.com>
, Tim Bray writes:
>To help sort things out in my own mind, I just went and read the last few
>hundred messages and attempted to curate the pervasive/mandatory encryption
>arguments, pro and contra. It's in a Google doc that's open to comment by
>anyone: http://goo.gl/6yhpC1 Hm, is there a handy wiki platform somewhere
>that can stand up to the pressure?
It's a good topline summary.
I would add:
C6.5: Pervasive encryption will be defeated by the agencies tasked with
performing pervasive surveillance: It's their job.
C6.6: Pervasive encryption runs a very big risk of being out-lawed, if
it makes pervasive surveillance impossible.
(And before any USAnians flash the "1st ammendment" card: Yes, you
have a constitutional right to say any damn thing you want, but not
to encrypt it, in particular not if the "national security" flag
is waved.)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 17 November 2013 08:16:40 UTC