Comment by mandmandam
1 year ago
> Companies whose customer data is encrypted can truthfully say that they have no way to access it for law enforcement. Telegram can’t.
I dunno man, kinda seems like you ought to either have a right to privacy or not. Surely there's other ways to make a case, without extraordinarily abusable legal strong-arming.
Why should a wealthy person be able to legally afford encrypted communication on a secure device, when 90+% of people can't because they're poor and tech illiterate?
Does our historically unequal society need more information and rights asymmetry between rich and poor? Between privileged and marginalized?
Downloading Signal is just as easy as downloading Telegram.
As I said, tech illiterate - or as likely, legally illiterate.
It's unreasonable to expect most people to intuit the distinction you describe.
However, you don't see wealthy people communicating on insecure devices, because they have people to take care of that stuff.
I'm really not sure what you're referring to. You see lots of wealthy people communicate on insecure devices, and it's quite common for law enforcement to demand and obtain the contents of their communications. "Look at these terrible messages we subpoenaed" is a staple of white collar criminal prosecutions.
4 replies →