If the government were to successfully mandate back doors in big companies' encryption, would everyone would just go third party? What would they do about that? There's no way they'll keep software out of peoples' hands. Is it financially viable to criminalize use of "unapproved" encryption?
Government would then move to 3rd parties making them put backdoors too.
>>52106968
They wouldn't be able to stop people in other countries from making good encryption products. It would be next to impossible for the government to bam encryption.
>>52107195
These are my sentiments as well. They will try their damnedest though
The USA already banned encryption in a sneaky way called CISA. Other governments will now follow. Enjoy your police state.
>>52107626
I don't know where you got that idea
>>52107195
it was but they let up on encryption in the 90s because poor cyber security was hurting usa based business and enterprise
>>52106968
> if
>mandate back doors
>hackers use these back doors
>government realizes that was a retarded idea
I'm kinda for them doing doing this. It will push us into an even more cyberpunk reality. Us /g/entoomen can become outlaw hackers and hide in the deepweb, planning our revolution.
We can also have secret cyb clubhouses that are off the grid/untraceable and we eat pizza and work on projects and meet qt hacker grills and okay I'll stop now
> Is it financially viable to criminalize use of "unapproved" encryption?
What would be the definition? "hey, that word is not in the dictionary! You will be hanged!" would all math be illegal? Or just math strictly connected to encryption? Many people know the math, are they going to arrest people for writing math text books just like Tarek Mehenna was thrown in jail for translating Al Qaida propaganda (also known as "aiding and abetting a terrorist organisation" the same law that could make a math professor jailed for 60 years for making a book about encryption)?
>>52109885
>professor doing something useful
kek
>>52108007
Companies can sell your information without your consent. Even banks can technically SELL your personal records if they wanted to. ANY information that you input into a "commercial service" can be sold. I am pretty sure this even includes your social security number and other personal information. Your information will be available on the free market. anyone getting doxed in the future is going to have a hard time.
Companies might come and promise to keep your info safe and then they might just sell your info after some slight changes in their terms and conditions which might not even register. Lots of the stuff you try to hide might already be out there.
>>52109980
>be gud enough that employers will have to hire you even though they look at you with disdain.
>>52109885
>have list of criminal encryption methods
And that's literally it. There aren't that many that are considered unbreakable, and it's anything but trivial to come up with a new one. Wannabe haxors who don't want to go to prison will have to stick to Caesar's cipher or some other shit that takes any computer literally less than a second to decipher.
>>52110141
If you are worried about it, cascade your cryptos anon.
I'll continue to rely on free software in which the users control the function of the software. No single person or company or government can stop the free speech of a worldwide free software movement.
