Slashdot Mirror
Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance Argues 'Privacy is Not Absolute' in Push For Encryption Backdoors (itnews.com.au)
The Five Eyes, the intelligence alliance between the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, issued a statement warning they believe "privacy is not absolute" and tech companies must give law enforcement access to encrypted data or face "technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions." Slashdot reader Bismillah shares a report: The governments of Australia, United States, United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand have made the strongest statement yet that they intend to force technology providers to provide lawful access to users' encrypted communications. At the Five Country Ministerial meeting on the Gold Coast last week, security and immigration ministers put forward a range of proposals to combat terrorism and crime, with a particular emphasis on the internet. As part of that, the countries that share intelligence with each other under the Five-Eyes umbrella agreement, intend to "encourage information and communications technology service providers to voluntarily establish lawful access solutions to their products and services." Such solutions will apply to products and services operated in the Five-Eyes countries which could legislate to compel their implementation. "Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions," the Five-Eyes joint statement on encryption said.
Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
English is my first language. This seems pretty clear to me.
You want access to data (encrypted or not) on my my potentially locked phone? Get a warrant! (If I still refuse to unlock and/or decrypt it after that then find me in contempt of court and jail me.
Now if only the gun nuts – who are so vocal about their Second Amendment rights when someone tries to tell them they shouldn't have AKs and M15s and bump stocks, or that there ought to be better background checks – were as vocal about "protecting" this Constitutional Right.
(By all means, keep your Saturday Night Specials, shotguns, and 22 and 30-06 rifles. "We" don't have a problem with people having those, with proper background checks.)
And whoever is perpetrating the myth the the Minutemen at Lexington and Concord had Gatling Guns? Knock that shit off. And the rest of you that believe it – because it fits your narrative – shame on you. They had muzzle loading flintlocks. That's it. The Gatling gun wasn't invented until the 1861, in time for the Civil war. If you don't know the difference between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War then it's back to eighth grade history for you.