Do you think they should have access in real time, or a delay/after the event? I'm torn between accountability of the officers (which ought to be an internal thing if it was done right) and making it difficult for anyone to monitor moves at that moment. I.e., full transparency after the fact, but not so much while they're trying to get a criminal.
Comment on USA | Police Are Increasingly Encrypting Their Radios to Block Scrutiny by Journalists
Zachariah@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Just give journalists a back door. If they aren’t doing anything wrong, they have nothing to hide. Just think of the children.
Rhaedas@fedia.io 3 months ago
Zachariah@lemmy.world 3 months ago
I was (tongue in cheek) saying is if law enforcement thinks it’s a good idea for the good guys to have back doors to encryption, they should be the first to show how well that works.
As a response to your point: I’d have to think about it. You brought up some interesting concerns.
occhionaut@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Real time, but have a court sanction a temporary information buffer for when theres a sting op or something that needs the hush hush. Thats my napkin math, anyway.
doodledup@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Backdoors to encryption don’t exist. A backdoor is basically just breaking the encryption. If a journalist can use it, anyone else can too.
FiniteLooper@lemm.ee 3 months ago
That’s the joke
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 months ago
You are taking “back door” too literally. If you give a journalist one of the communication devices, they have a “back door” into your encrypt communication, yet the encryption isn’t broken.