>he fell for the encryption meme

Why do you really need encryption, Sup Forums?

Isn't this right to privacy thing a commie meme?

Other urls found in this thread:

gwu.edu/~ccps/lop.html
cryptovirology.com/cryptovfiles/newbook/Chapter10.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Huh? Commie meme? Okay, kid, I don't think you know what communism is. Total government control of the citizenships personal life is exactly what communism entails as it is the only way communism can exist. Perhaps you don't live in a past soviet state so you never heard of commie police busting in your communal apartament to search you and your roomates for "signs of enemies of the state".

But positive rights are statism, you retard.

What?

it's a libertarian

do not bother

Why do you need encryption?
To protect personally identifiable information from parties who would be interested in exploiting it for their own personal gain.

Then the use of encryption should be limited to protect that information and nothing else, lest terrorists and child-pornographers exploit it to avoid the law.

Honestly my porn tastes are incredibly vanilla. Baremaidens.com, Femjoy things like that.

I really just don't like the government's dick resting my shoulder trying to sell me things.

>commie meme
>privacy
Nigger, commies wiretapped people just for kicks after shadowing political dissidents and making them disappear. Commies had no sense of privacy.

How do you know it's personal information and not cp when the data is encrypted?

You install backdoors that the authorities can use to decrypt it so they are able to tell, you fucking moron!

Commies also hated and persecuted gays and jews, but apparently it's some kind of meme leaked from Sup Forums that equal rights are communist ideas.

>You install backdoors that the authorities can use
and also the identity thieves and snoopers and crooked governments too.

Nice conspiracy theories, fagtron.

Just don't give them access, you mongoloid.

No, communism implies less privacy

>leaks don't exist
>exploits used and maintained by governments are never used by thieves, snoopers and other crooked governments

>You install backdoors that the authorities can use to decrypt it so they are able to tell, you fucking moron!
if there is a backdoor anyone can use it. you moron!

Here's some piece of logic:
The ban on encryption, would totally work because __criminals__ sure love to follow the law.

We can also install backdoors on every piece of hardware known to man, because sure no one will find out, because the government is a hell lot smart.

>let's not do anything because we're too scared, the risk are too big!
Boo fucking hoo why are you even online then?

>What are passwords?

you dont know what a backdoor is son.

If it was that easy, the security industry wouldn't be required.

>let's not do it because it is too hard
No wonder you're such an unsuccessful underachiever.

Have you ever heard of asymmetric backdoors?

You paranoid lunatics calmly trust massive corporations with more sensitive keys and then look surprised when your credit card information is compromised, but talk about putting in place a secure system to allow government to investigate terrorism and you go apeshit in a second. What the fuck are you hiding that makes you so scared of such a possibility?

Because I have a right to privacy.

TAXES ARE THEFT!!!! I DON'T WANT ROADS, HOSPITALS OR POLICE FORCES!

the more holes you put in security the more holes there are to exploit. plain and simple.

Haha ok. Next thing you'll tell me you have a right to healthcare, education and clean water.

Well with encryption I can enforce my own right to privacy.

Ahmed, pls

Well, it didn't seem to help Hillary

You're repeating yourself, that claim has already been addressed. Reread the thread.

This.

That stupid "durr everything I don't like is gommunism!" meme has to stop!

maybe you jsut dont get it. anyways have fun with your bait thread time for pannycakes and bakey.

gwu.edu/~ccps/lop.html

>you don't seem to be convinced by my half-baked "ad nauseam" fallacy, so you must be bait
Grow up.

how about you. you dont have the faintest idea how security works.

What you don't see is that in order to detect those they also have to infringe upon law-abiding citizens' privacy. Like yours or mine.
People can create their own encryption algorithms, it's impossible to enforce a ban on encryption. The only ones who will actually suffer from it are the normal people who use standardized encryption algorithms that can be identified.
Criminals are criminals and won't not encrypt their data because the law tells them not to. And nobody can tell if the data produced by some proprietary encryption algorithm used within criminal communities only is just a secure eraese (random data), an unknown file format, or actually encryption.
Restricting encryption won't permanently solve anything. It will just temporarily get some criminals convicted and then be useless for everything else than hurting the general population.
There is still no ban on talking behind closed doors, which I'd imagine is much more relevant in the war on serious crime.

Privacy is an actual right, healthcare, clean water, education are privileges.

By that logic we wouldn't do anything because every action has a risk.

Have you people never heard of risk management?

you dont intentionally poke holes in security there are already plenty. why do you think everything is getting hacked lately. the nsa actively pays companies to put in exploits and then tell them how to access them.

Enlighten me then, know-it-all.

>What you don't see is that in order to detect those they also have to infringe upon law-abiding citizens' privacy
Let's ban police searches then too.

AM I BEING DETAINED!?

Seems like paranoid conspiracy theories to me
I'd rather go for the logical conclusion that it's more widespread, there's more incompetence and anybody and their mom has a laptop and could potentially look for holes in software
Look at all the efforts people make to make development and administration easy. It inevitably brings vulnerabilities with it.

Asymmetric backdoors by definition can only be exploited by the ones who planted them. Study some more.

That's just like your opinion man. One could argue privacy isn't a right. Even if it undoubtedly were, no right is absolute. Rights have limits.

A police search is far different. That would be like demanding to see someone's unencrypted data.

HAIL H̶Y̶D̶R̶A̶ CULTURAL MARXISM

Ever heard of toll roads, private hospitals or security companies?

checkmate commie.

Not really. Encryption enthusiasts often claim nobody lives in glass houses, making the analogy between encrypting data and hiding something. When the police searches your pockets, your car or your house, they are searching your hidden things. When the police tells you to open your bag so they can see what's inside, they're telling you to reveal something hidden. A police search isn't far different. As a matter of fact, by the privacy enthusiasts' own analogy, it is the exact same thing.

>That's just like your opinion man. One could argue privacy isn't a right. Even if it undoubtedly were, no right is absolute. Rights have limits.
Maybe, but privacy cannot be given, it can only be taken.

>build wall
>give privacy

wut

a backdoor is an exploit that someone programmed into a program they created in order maintain access to the information after they no longer have access to the system. It is inherently unsecured because it is security hole hard coded intentionally into the program. The only thing keeping it secure is that it has to be discovered by other would be hackers before it can be used. Since the knowledge leaked that the nsa is doing this it gives hackers the motivation they need to keep looking for it because they know somewhere there is most likely an nsa backdoor.

You are aware that cultural "marxism" is a misnomer, right?

Political correctness has nothing to do with communism or marxism. That's a right-wing meme.

Except encrypted data is not hidden. It simply does not exist until the key to decrypt it is provided.
What's behind a locked door does exist even if it isn't provided.

lrn2cryptography

cryptovirology.com/cryptovfiles/newbook/Chapter10.pdf

That would be giving privacy back, which implies it has to be taken away first, by other people being around.

>encrypted data does not exist

You are aware that walls don't naturally exist, right?

>Based on our knowledge of the subject, the
following appears to hold: no experimental implementation of an asymmet-
ric backdoor in RSA key generation has been made publicly available and
none have been scrutinized by the research community.

>56616805
>it simply does not exist until the key to decrypt it is provided
You don't need the key to decrypt it, don't you know that? It just takes billions of years to decrypt it without the key with current computers, but it is possible.

>>encrypted data does not exist
Sorry, to clarify, the unencrypted data doesn't exist until it is created from the encrypted data.
Just like PCM doesn't exist in MP3 until it's decoded from it.

Fuck, deleted a meme arrow by accident!

You are aware that humans following you around anywhere you go doesn't naturally exist, right?

I am not on the paranoid side of this argument, kid.

Then you are creating the key, or a substitute for the key that works the same way. And then you are using that to create the data you want from the encrypted data.

You fail to understand, humans following you around and listening to your conversations is exactly your privacy being taken away from you.
Walls are not the only form of privacy, being all alone somewhere is also privacy.

>It's another "You can trust the Stasi episode" on Sup Forums

Encryption doesn't destroy data, it just transforms it. The data was created before and it keeps existing even after encrypted.

lrn2math

No, naturally you don't have any privacy. That's a human creation. Even sex is something done in public in nature. We don't naturally live alone, and having to move somewhere desert to be private is the process of gaining privacy.

And until it is transformed back it doesn't exist.
Just like how the past does not exist, only the result of the things that happened.

>if nobody has done it yet, that means it can't be done

Naturally you have the right to go somewhere and be in private. By being around other people you are willingly giving up your privacy.

>Why do you really need encryption, Sup Forums?
That's entirely the wrong question to ask. It's irrelevant whether I "need" it or not.
Why should the state or anyone else have any right to tell me I can't use it?

But a police search is precisely about determining somebody's past as a function of its result.

it means theres nothing to learn from that article because its just a concept. and why would you want htis anyways wtf is wrong with you?

The objects used to determine that still exist in the present.

So does the ciphertext.

If going places is a right, then you were wrong here when you claimed humans following you around is taking your rights away. It isn't, because they're just exercising their right to go somewhere.

Yeah, why should the state tell me if I can use child porn or not?

>theres nothing to learn from that article because its just a concept
Holy shit, you are dumb! Everything starts at the concept level, you retard!

>why would you want htis
To stop Ahmed from blowing your entire block to bits and raping your 11-yo daughter on camera, you fucknut.

>wtf is wrong with you?
Wtf are you hiding, you piece of shit?

But that's not the original data.
If you eat a banana and shit it out, the banana doesn't exist anymore, your shit exists.
Sometimes the results of the past can determine the past, but not always.

A lot of rights infringe upon others' rights. This is why rights are restricted.

The original data can be determined from the encrypted data.

>This is why rights are restricted.
Except for privacy, right? That right is unlimited according to you paranoid encryptards.

Will bernie sanders swoop in before the election now that hillary can't hide her parkinson?
Or will she just forfeit to trump?

>calling people dumb for not wanting to build backdoors into encrypted security.

all they do on the internet is recruit. I bet you think they are collecting phone conversations from every American because Isis likes to call America on the phone too.

considering all the shady shit the government has already been caught covering up I wouldnt trust them with being able to access personal and business records. whats stopping them from giving trade secrets and inside info to the highest bidder? I mean we are already letting drug cartel bosses off the hook in the name of national security.

>giving up freedom from terrorism and child pornography just so you can be safe from the GUBMINT boogeyman

...

>muh technology sector
>implying trump and hillary didn't receive much more money

>Commie meme? Okay, kid, I don't think you know what communism is. Total government control of the citizenships personal life is exactly what communism entails as it is the only way communism can exist.
but that's wrong, you fucking retard

...

>reverse troll
kys.

>implying trump and hillary didn't receive much more money
They did, but from Wall Street.

>implying this shit will ever stop terrorism
Backdoors don't really help that much against terrorists, or any other organised crime. They aren't really trying to control criminals anymore, but people.

"They" who?

The government :^)

>the government is disorganized, incompetent and erratic
>but they sure are carrying out some highly elaborate conspiracies to spy on us

nice strawman.

The real strawman here is:

>"they" aren't really trying to regulate encryption in order to fight crime, "they" wanna control our lives!

That's not only a strawman, but also a red herring. By questioning the motives behind it, you drive debate away from the possible benefits or drawbacks in implementing widespread asymmetric backdoors and onto irrelevant and wild conspiracy theories.

nice strawman. I never said any of that. but you should look up the definition of government.

>I never said any of that.
Nice backpedaling, you nigger.