this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
141 points (98.6% liked)

Privacy

35875 readers
1016 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RangerJosey@lemmy.ml 63 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] Steve@communick.news 51 points 2 weeks ago

So get a warrant.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 46 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

There is no 'lawful access' without a warrant or my permission. there aren't laws saying padlocks need to support a government master key, and encryption is just a digital lock.

[–] Octagon9561@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's literally what TSA approved locks are... Of course the master keys are freely available to everyone.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 1 points 2 weeks ago

yeah, which is why we need to make sure that doesn't happen to other locks (and make the TSA start doing security instead of security theater).

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

With a pad lock they do have a key though. Bolt cutters.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Bolt cutters are not a key, they are a method of bypassing the lock. they still need a warrant to do that, which is the point.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

they still need a warrant to do that

Lol...

In fascism, if you have the biggest gun, you do what you want. And Trump has the biggest "gun"

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm talking about legally, and as much as I don't like trump we are not in a fascist country (yet).

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago

What do you think the line is? When will it cross over and become acceptable to call it "fascism"? Because we've embodied Eco's 14 features of Ur-Fascism for like 20 years. We now have a de facto dictator who is using that framework to do explicitly fascist things... Where is the line?

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The laws don't exist though because they're so easily circumvented. If you AES256 encrypt something today, there's an extremely lonely chance they can't crack it. For years.

With a padlock they can just pull out the cutters and they're done.

I'm just referring to your point on why there are no laws against padlocks in this context.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

fair enough, padlock was the wrong type of lock for the analogy. how about a vault door? sure that may not be as common, but you don't have to support a government master key for those either.

[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Same thing goes for vaults, or all physical locks. It may take a little longer than a padlock but nothing comparable to the amount of time it would take to brute force good encryption. We’re talking maybe a couple of hours or days for a vault vs. millions of years.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 2 points 2 weeks ago

so? does the quality of my lock change whether or not I should be allowed to have it?

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 37 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

any 'lawful' access that's baked-in will also be used and exploited 'unlawfully'.

[–] madame_gaymes@programming.dev 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And they don't give a shit 100%

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 weeks ago

It's the entire fucking point.

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 33 points 2 weeks ago

It's not my responsibility to make the FBI's job (or any cop's job) easier.

Also, folks should be using 3rd party open-source encryption, like VeraCrypt and a password manager that encrypts the database, like Keepass. Don't ever expect governments and corporations to respect your privacy.

[–] sibachian@lemmy.ml 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

fbi want direct access to encrypted data while simultaneously also all data to be encrypted in order to be protected from china?

do explain how this is all going to work because it's extremely confusing.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The explanation is that they will just use this shit to target whomever they please regardless of reason. This is how fascism works.

It is meant to be confusing. Stop trying to rationalize it, you're wasting energy.

[–] onlooker@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 weeks ago
[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for your interest, but I'll have to pass.

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 weeks ago

"So don't make us torture you for encryption keys got it?"

[–] uxellodunum@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 weeks ago
[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 weeks ago

I warn FBI. Fuck you.

[–] endofline@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

For some reason I'm feeling so Amish... Seems like they were so right with technology risks :-)

[–] WarlockoftheWoods@lemy.lol 7 points 2 weeks ago