Backdoor access means that tech companies would create a way for government authorities to bypass encryption, allowing them to access private communications for surveillance and investigation. Proponents argue that it helps law enforcement and intelligence agencies prevent terrorism and criminal activities by providing necessary access to information. Opponents argue that it compromises user privacy, weakens overall security, and could be exploited by malicious actors.
@ISIDEWITH9mos9MO
@9ZZ7YJ33mos3MO
No, any backdoor that exists for national security purposes also exists for anyone else clever enough to find it. There is no such thing as a backdoor that only specific people can use.
@B388WPZ4 days4D
No, but they should be required to hand over any relevant information in regards to an investigation
@B2WPRX82wks2W
Government should only be targeting criminals and have policies and procedures in place to avoiding harming innocent people and pay for any damages caused to those innocent people
@B2JP85Q1mo1MO
No but increase spending for programs that infiltrate drug, sex trafficking and other illegal operations
@9ZLXJRXOne Nation3mos3MO
Under strict conditions. Don’t want government investigating people for disagreeing with government policy
@9WV5Y6Z4mos4MO
Possibly, again, this appears to be for of a federal government question. Sounds suspicious or not in depth with detail etc.
Tech campanies should be required only when there is sufficient reason to believe activities pertaining to the risk of national security are occuring, it should not be by default.
@9WK3YLP4mos4MO
maybe but there needs to be new regulations put in place to protect privecy such as needing a worrant for someting to do that kind of investigation
@9WBP9K54mos4MO
Like bugging and telephone wire taps in the past, it would seem reasonable for gov agencies to have access where a reasonable suspicion exists and a magistrate has granted access.
@9W7FMBV4mos4MO
I believe no for a general rule, as that can be harmful for privacy, yet there should be systems in place to flag dangerous online activity like engaging in human trafficking and weapons trafficking.
@9SYC4SQ6mos6MO
Only provide case by case basis and court orders for known terrorists.
@9SDXXLV6mos6MO
Yes, but if national security is securely defined.
@9PWFPP48mos8MO
No I general, unless there is a court order to investigate a specific individual
@9PDPBQY8mos8MO
Yes, but only in extreme situations, since it is necessary to combat terrorism.
@9NZLVN99mos9MO
Tech companies should not provide encrypted communications.
@9NT25LD9mos9MO
No, no matter how good the security is someone will find a way to compromise it
@9NHLFQY9mos9MO
In an ideal world with no corruption and exploitation of personal data, this would be ok. But since it's currently not this ideal world, I'd have to say no for the time being. Or at least if it was required, there would need to be strict restrictions and rules.
Yes, but their must be conditions and proper procedure in place so that the information is only accessed under official investigation from police and law enforcement bodies.
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.