Attacks on encrypted communicxatiopn rising in Europe

Robert J. Hansen rjh at
Wed Aug 24 16:27:58 CEST 2016

> Why would we listen to anyone for that matter?

Ideally, because they present options that may work better than what we
currently have.  Privacy absolutism -- the position that there is *no*
justification for infringing on individual privacy, even in the case of
serious crimes -- doesn't offer anything better than what we currently
have.  In fact, many people would think it was a lot worse.

> until he talks"). In hindsight it was a bit ill-formatted to put it
> between the methods I did agree with. I'm OK with technical attacks, I
> am firmly against obligations to talk or pressuring people to talk with
> torture, prison terms or fines.

Okay, I can understand speaking glibly: thank you for clarifying you're
opposed to that.

But if you're okay with technical attacks, you're not a privacy
absolutist, either.  If your solution is targeted malware, remote
exploits, Trojans, and the like, then you're permitting the government
to do an awful lot to subvert privacy.

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list