Governments compromising privacy

[Charles-Tim]

The United States Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs has disapproved end-to-end encryption. Goverments generally like to compromise privacy and yet saying they are protecting peoples privacy. COJ concluded that 'we are committed to working with industry to develop reasonable proposals that will allow technology companies and governments to protect the public and their privacy, defend cyber security and human rights and support technological innovation'.

In July 2019, the governments of the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada issued a communique, concluding that: “tech companies should include mechanisms in the design of their encrypted products and services whereby governments, acting with appropriate legal authority, can gain access to data in a readable and usable format. Those companies should also embed the safety of their users in their system designs, enabling them to take action against illegal content.”[5]  On 8 October 2019, the Council of the EU adopted its conclusions on combating child sexual abuse, stating: “The Council urges the industry to ensure lawful access for law enforcement and other competent authorities to digital evidence, including when encrypted or hosted on IT servers located abroad, without prohibiting or weakening encryption and in full respect of privacy and fair trial guarantees consistent with applicable law
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/international-statement-end-end-encryption-and-public-safety
I do not know how governments will be compromising privacy and yet saying they are protecting privacy. They want end-to-end encryption on social media and other sites to be disabled in a way they can assess users data, and yet saying they are protecting privacy. I am confused, why such big lies?

[blackbirdbitcoin]

The United States Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs has disapproved end-to-end encryption. Goverments generally like to compromise privacy and yet saying they are protecting peoples privacy. COJ concluded that 'we are committed to working with industry to develop reasonable proposals that will allow technology companies and governments to protect the public and their privacy, defend cyber security and human rights and support technological innovation'.

In July 2019, the governments of the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada issued a communique, concluding that: “tech companies should include mechanisms in the design of their encrypted products and services whereby governments, acting with appropriate legal authority, can gain access to data in a readable and usable format. Those companies should also embed the safety of their users in their system designs, enabling them to take action against illegal content.”[5]  On 8 October 2019, the Council of the EU adopted its conclusions on combating child sexual abuse, stating: “The Council urges the industry to ensure lawful access for law enforcement and other competent authorities to digital evidence, including when encrypted or hosted on IT servers located abroad, without prohibiting or weakening encryption and in full respect of privacy and fair trial guarantees consistent with applicable law
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/international-statement-end-end-encryption-and-public-safety
I do not know how governments will be compromising privacy and yet saying they are protecting privacy. They want end-to-end encryption on social media and other sites to be disabled in a way they can assess users data, and yet saying they are protecting privacy. I am confused, why such big lies?

Are you even surprised? Governments will do what they want, when they want and how they want. Only trick is to beat them to their own game. How you may ask? Blockchain is the only answer. Over the years we have built many great blockchains. The issue with them all is not really scalability. It's just that they did not think enough about regulations but focused more on technology. Nobody can stop technical advancements. We all know that, but governments are going to come down hard on not just traditional tech companies like you mentiond about what is happening around the world but also on blockchain. So the only trick here is to hold the governments accountable.

How do we do that?

Introduce absolute privacy for all data, but make sure everything is visible on the public blockchain so that there is a reasonable amount of trust between "We the people" and the governments. Data and information is shared only when there is a legal court order.  This brings in a very big amount of accountability and also helps citizens enjoy privacy which should be a universal right. I like how Concordium has understood this and is experimenting with this very idea. I think they will succeed. At least that is the hope. Play by the book, by the regulations and make it an equal playing ground for commons and the Governments.

Incase of any malpractice or something "unconstitutional" they will be exposed. There's no way they can ban something if its 100% legit and legal. They need to play by their own rules! 

[jrrsparkles]

End to end encryption itself a biggest lie, or a marketing gimmick because it has been found that end to encrypted calls and chats can be accessed without need of decrypt and can read what has been inside so we are not having any privacy at all when it comes to social media.

[Charles-Tim]

End to end encryption itself a biggest lie, or a marketing gimmick because it has been found that end to encrypted calls and chats can be accessed without need of decrypt and can read what has been inside so we are not having any privacy at all when it comes to social media.

Very possible this could be true, especially if using sites that are not trusted and that can be manipulated, but unlike some social network like WhatsApp, I do not think users data can be leaked. But, do you have any link or something that this is well addressed, about how end-to-end encryptions are actually not real.

[Mauser]

End to end encryption itself a biggest lie, or a marketing gimmick because it has been found that end to encrypted calls and chats can be accessed without need of decrypt and can read what has been inside so we are not having any privacy at all when it comes to social media.

I agree with you, it's mostly the social media industry claiming that encryption is a 100% secure. We should resist such statements and be more critical with our personal information in my opinion. In our modern times it is always a tradeoff between being active on social media and sharing our private things and trying to maintain some form of privacy.

[Dorodha]

Governments compromising privacy is very difficult to protect the privacy of information through social networks. The information collected will be used for official purposes only, internal review improvement of the content of the website. The government may disclose personal information of any person in case of any legal requirement such as search warrant or court order. It will be possible to collect your personal information when you participate in e-mails surveys or provide feedback or communication information through the Website. The case will become easier if legal action is taken.

[vaultman]

Personally, I don't believe in internet privacy at all. Each action leaves a so-called digital footprint, which can be used to track the activities of any user. Naturally, states are interested in this kind of tracking. The more control over people, the more benefits the state will gain.

[yazher]

Personally, I don't believe in internet privacy at all. Each action leaves a so-called digital footprint, which can be used to track the activities of any user. Naturally, states are interested in this kind of tracking. The more control over people, the more benefits the state will gain.

They just wanted to gather some data to use it for later. Anyone knows how many people are active in his country can use that number for election. He will just focus on some County that has a lot of people the basic move of politics. But if knows everything from their needs and hobbies, he could manipulate them by telling false promises to attract some voters that would give him the win.

[squatz1]

End to end encryption itself a biggest lie, or a marketing gimmick because it has been found that end to encrypted calls and chats can be accessed without need of decrypt and can read what has been inside so we are not having any privacy at all when it comes to social media.

Very possible this could be true, especially if using sites that are not trusted and that can be manipulated, but unlike some social network like WhatsApp, I do not think users data can be leaked. But, do you have any link or something that this is well addressed, about how end-to-end encryptions are actually not real.

Well, when things are encrypted and the private key for the encryption isn't in the hands of the company who is encrypting it for you -- like Signal -- then you're going to be fine.

Legal investigations have shown that even Facebook doesn't have the private keys for WhatsApp, as in the case of the Mueller investigation, they were not able to get Facebook to decrypt the communication because they had no way to do that. They were able to get Michael Cohen because of the fact that he was backing up his unencrypted backups of WhatsApp to ICloud which Apple was able to hand over.

Governments will continue to compromise privacy, though people have to get smarter.