Experts are pushing back against Europol’s chief, Catherine De Bolle, who argued that anonymity is not a fundamental right and called for technology companies to create backdoors for law enforcement to access encrypted communications.
Critics contend that such measures would compromise the security of all users, as any backdoor could be exploited by malicious actors, undermining the very purpose of encryption.
The ongoing debate highlights the tension between the need for secure communication and law enforcement’s desire to combat crime.
Many experts warn that weakening encryption could lead to mass surveillance and increased vulnerabilities in secure systems.
Due to these security concerns, the EU’s proposed Chat Control legislation, which seeks to mandate these backdoors, has faced significant resistance and uncertainty regarding its implementation.
Editor’s Note: It would be naive to believe that backdoors into encrypted systems do not already exist. For instance, while Mark Zuckerberg promotes WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption, his track record.
Of course, we sincerely hope that such private communications still exist, and for now, we place our trust in Telegram, Signal, and Proton Mail.
But still, it is essential to be careful with the kind of data we share online, even in the platforms we trust.
Read Original Article
Read Online
Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.
Read Offline
Click the button below if you wish to read the article offline.
Snowden knows that in every computer system there is always a way in, but this Europol chief wanted it to be easy by asking for a backdoor or she just want protection because her agency have been snooping into people’s accounts. Her proposal is the same as legalizing pedophilia. Not all sensitive information are being communicated online so why don’t she also propose that all meetings, especially those of freemasons and Bilderbergers to be open too to the public? Let’s see how they would reason out the importance of privacy.