# Is the FBI right in decrying the stronger encryption about to come to smartphones? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 28, 2014, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754 "2014-09-28T02:28:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/61 "2014-09-28T20:24:46Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You already voluntarily divulge that information to for-profit corporations day in and day out. No I don’t. There’s plenty of information that only myself and my family, or only ourselves plus a few select individuals in whom we trust, know, and no “for profit corporations” are aware of. > [@](#): > > Why do you care if the government knows, and why do you think the government _cares_? Because it’s none of their business. > [@](#): > > This is all circular; the argument boils down to “I don’t want the government in my business because the government shouldn’t be in my business, and they shouldn’t be in my business because I don’t want them in my business.” That’s a pretty good argument when it’s private information like health, hygiene, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/62 "2014-09-28T20:24:48Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Because there’s a fundamental human right to privacy which needs to be respected and is an inherent part of the natural value of human beings? Says who? What makes it so “fundamental” that the government has no right to abrogate it? > [@](#): > > More pragmatically, because I do not trust my government unconditionally? Well, none of us are perfect. > [@](#): > > Because it is not some vast, monolithic entity with the sole purpose of doing good (this is almost exactly the same spiel I give conservatives who blame “big government” for everything wrong with the world) but rather is made up of _people_. And people can be vindictive, shitty, and all-around unpleasant. Then let’s not punish the government for the sins of the people. > [@](#): > > The fact that I very much enjoy Twixie shipping involving particularly violent and vindictive sex is entirely _legal_. But would I want the cop who has pulled me over to know that I’m into that shit? Why do you assume he would care? > [@](#): > > Do you think it would increase his odds of being unfair to me if he saw those pictures on my phone? Under what circumstances do you imagine a routine traffic stop turning into the officer perusing your photo gallery? > [@](#): > > Or hell, just a simpler example - a closeted gay teacher in the south. What _of_ a closeted gay teacher in the south? > [@](#): > > It’s not circular, it’s axiomatic. “They shouldn’t be in my business because the right to privacy is a fundamental human right”. There is no such thing as a “fundamental” human right. There is no supernatural being nor force of nature proclaiming that humans have certain rights. Humans have rights because we _made them up_ and created governments to safeguard them. In the end, government is the only thing that defines, grants, or guarantees you rights - and in the end, it can take any of them away. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/63 "2014-09-28T20:26:05Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No I don’t. There’s plenty of information that only myself and my family, or only ourselves plus a few select individuals in whom we trust, know, and no “for profit corporations” are aware of. Sure there is. > [@](#): > > Because it’s none of their business. Why not? > [@](#): > > That’s a pretty good argument when it’s private information like health, hygiene, etc. Your health stopped being “private information” when you discussed it with your doctor. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/64 "2014-09-28T20:37:27Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > In the end, government is the only thing that defines, grants, or guarantees you rights - and in the end, it can take any of them away. In the end, governments only have the power we give them. This power, which you seem to assume they already have, I do not wish them to have. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/65 "2014-09-28T20:42:31Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In the end, governments only have the power we give them. This power, which you seem to assume they already have, I do not wish them to have. Then take it from them if you think you can. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/66 "2014-09-28T20:44:16Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Says who? What makes it so “fundamental” that the government has no right to abrogate it? Good question! The answer: _we do_. Just like we consider the right to life, the right to bodily autonomy, and the right to free speech fundamental. The government has no right to abrogate it because we as a society deem it vital to the human condition, and because the result when there is no such right to privacy is often totalitarian and almost always negative. What follows is a handful of the most woefully misguided statements I’ve seen in a long time. They completely miss the point to an almost insane degree. Seriously, dude, what the hell? None of this warrants a refutation. It’s inane. > [@](#): > > Well, none of us are perfect. > > Then let’s not punish the government for the sins of the people. > > Why do you assume he would care? > > Under what circumstances do you imagine a routine traffic stop turning into the officer perusing your photo gallery? > > What _of_ a closeted gay teacher in the south? Christ, you cannot seriously be this naive. Yes, why _would_ it matter to a closeted gay teacher in the south whether or not he had the right to privacy? Whether a local sheriff knew whether or not he was gay? After all, it’s not like something like that could [end his career](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ivrcVSdaM) (hell, that’s not even a _gay_ teacher. That’s just an atheist). > [@](#): > > There is no such thing as a “fundamental” human right. There is no supernatural being nor force of nature proclaiming that humans have certain rights. Humans have rights because we _made them up_ and created governments to safeguard them. In the end, government is the only thing that defines, grants, or guarantees you rights - and in the end, it can take any of them away. When your argument just as easily dismisses the right to free speech or the right to life, the problem is not the right you are arguing against, it is a flaw with your argument. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/67 "2014-09-28T20:48:28Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Then take it from them if you think you can. That’s what our courts are for. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/68 "2014-09-28T20:51:10Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Good question! The answer: _we do_. Well, now we’re making progress. > [@](#): > > The government has no right to abrogate it because we as a society deem it vital to the human condition Well, of _course_ the government has a right to abrogate it, because the government is the people and therefore cannot act contrary to their will. > [@](#): > > Christ, you cannot seriously be this naive. Yes, why _would_ it matter to a closeted gay teacher in the south whether or not he had the right to privacy? Whether a local sheriff knew whether or not he was gay? After all, it’s not like something like that could [end his career](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ivrcVSdaM) (hell, that’s not even a _gay_ teacher. That’s just an atheist). I wouldn’t choose to continue living in a place where my career was predicated on my religious belief - and if I had no choice but to do so, then I would either change my beliefs or change my career. > [@](#): > > When your argument just as easily dismisses the right to free speech or the right to life, the problem is not the right you are arguing against, it is a flaw with your argument. And now you’ve gone back to assuming that “the right to free speech or the right to life” is some objective, cosmically-defined decree, instead of being something that people made up, and demanding that logic itself bend to your personal preferences as to how the world should be. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/69 "2014-09-28T20:53:14Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > When your argument just as easily dismisses the right to free speech or the right to life, the problem is not the right you are arguing against, it is a flaw with your argument. What I I find very disturbing is actually wanting to argue _against_ that right-arguing for complete capitulation to the state when it comes to fundamental freedoms fought for. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/70 "2014-09-28T20:56:38Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What I I find very disturbing is actually wanting to argue _against_ that right-arguing for complete capitulation to the state when it comes to fundamental freedoms fought for. The only reason you have _any_ rights whatsoever is because the state exists to provide and protect them. To fight against the state is to fight against the notion of rights. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/71 "2014-09-28T20:57:47Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > This isn’t about mass surveillance, it’s about the police not being able to execute a legitimate warrant. Police can execute legitimate warrants just fine – _to the owner of the phone_. The idea that they should serve them to Apple or Google instead is as silly as the idea of serving a warrant for stolen money in a mattress to Sealy Posturpedic. > [@](#): > > It has nothing to do with spying or cybercrime, as no-one is suggesting banning encryption, only ensuring that manufacturer-provided encryption can be broken by the manufacturer should they receive a warrant. Either you protect against cybercrime, or you insert a backdoor and facilitate cybercrime. If the FBI actually wanted to reduce crime, it would applaud this development. > [@Steophan](#): > > It seems to me that a reasonable compromise is allowing someone to make an active choice to encrypt, but not having it done by default. That’s ridiculous on its face. Such a policy is specially tailored to withhold protection _only_ from people who aren’t actively asserting a right to privacy, while protecting secrets both licit and illicit. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/72 "2014-09-28T21:00:51Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Then take it from them if you think you can. Isn’t that exactly what’s happening in this situation? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/73 "2014-09-28T21:02:11Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Police can execute legitimate warrants just fine – _to the owner of the phone_. The idea that they should serve them to Apple or Google instead is as silly as the idea of serving a warrant for stolen money in a mattress to Sealy Posturpedic. Except that in this case, Sealy Posturpedic has produced a mattress which cannot be opened or X-rayed unless the guy who sleeps on it says “Mother May I”, and you have provided him the legal right to pretend to be a deaf-mute, and required the police to blindfold themselves while in the same room as the mattress unless he suddenly regains the power of speech. > [@](#): > > Either you protect against cybercrime, or you insert a backdoor and facilitate cybercrime. If the FBI actually wanted to reduce crime, it would applaud this development. Either you protect against terrorism and child molestation, or you develop and sell for profit a piece of software that makes it impossible for the police to find out about the kids you’re raping and the journalists you’re beheading. If Apple and Google wanted to reduce crime, they’d work with the government, not against it. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/74 "2014-09-28T21:02:21Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Then take it from them if you think you can. Mission Accomplished. Apple, Google, take your bows… ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/75 "2014-09-28T21:03:54Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Mission Accomplished. Apple, Google, take your bows… …and stand against the board, here’s a blindfold and a cigarette. Never thought I’d see the day when people who claimed to call themselves liberals were _cheering_ for the triumph of multinational conglomerates over the government. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/76 "2014-09-28T21:05:05Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You mock the question, but you don’t answer it. If you’re not breaking the law, why do you care if the government knows what you’re up to? You have got to be kidding me. 1. The government can change the law. Some aspect of my perfectly legal activities right now could be deemed subversive if the congress passes a law tomorrow. And since they are monitoring me they will know right where to go. Of course, you will argue that I should be a good citizen and should track the text of every bill that goes through congress just to make sure that all these materials I store, be they Islamic newspaper clippings, clerical fatwas, nudie pics. Whatever. This is no joke, did you know that many of the state Republican platforms currently call for all pornography to be illegal. What percentage of American men have some kind of pornography stored somewhere on their computer or phone? 1. Even legal information can cause damage. Take for instance the case of Martin Luther King Jr. As far as I know, he did nothing illegal but the FBI considered him (and wrote in a [memo](http://lawrencerspencer.com/tag/most-dangerous-negro/)) that he was the “most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country.” Even though he was not a criminal the government surveilled him in an attempt to prove he was a communist, something they were never able to prove even though they installed wiretaps on his phones, in his home and in many of hotel rooms. They used the information they did find, on his personal, legal relationships to threaten him, to attempt to blackmail him, and in attempts to discredit him. How many erstwhile political leaders have been brought down through allegations of sexual but legal misconduct? Is this an acceptable use of government power? 1. The chilling of political speech: Let’s say I know that my cellphone, texts, emails, etc… are being monitored. Rhetorical question: is there a possibility a reasonable person would censor themselves knowing this in a perfectly legal criticism of the current administration or legislature? Don’t you think that these kinds of fears could subvert our democracy? Any possibility? Should we not guard against this danger? 2. Petty officials abusing their powers: If you want I could link to a dozen stories of government officials abusing their power. Do you need me to? Allowing government to monitor the activities of common citizens just gives more access for this kind of abuse. Think about what police departments could do with the current civil forfeiture laws if it had a good handle on everybody’s finances and social support structures. Do you need more reasons why it is important to limit government power in this regard? Can you address the problems I have laid out here? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/77 "2014-09-28T21:05:12Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Either you protect against terrorism and child molestation, or you …act as a pathetic enabler when the people hired to do those jobs whine and moan “It’s too haaaaarrrrrd to do it within the rules made by We The People”. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/78 "2014-09-28T21:11:37Z")
The point is that time and again we have seen that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Total information awareness is in many way synonymous to absolute power. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/79 "2014-09-28T21:13:40Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > …and stand against the board, here’s a blindfold and a cigarette. Yes, the terrorists will surely kill us all now that our phones are slightly better encrypted. You’ll be sorry! > [@](#): > > Never thought I’d see the day when people who claimed to call themselves liberals were _cheering_ for the triumph of multinational conglomerates over the government. The government has been breaking the law left and right. Did you expect liberals to cheer for that? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754/80 "2014-09-28T21:14:40Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The only reason you have _any_ rights whatsoever is because the state exists to provide and protect them. > > To fight against the state is to fight against the notion of rights. Exsqueeze me? If this is a government of, by and for the people, then I(being a people) have every right in the world to put my two cents in when it comes to what my government does for/to me, and when enough people put their two cents into the pot it soon becomes apparent where the buck is going to stop eventually. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-fbi-right-in-decrying-the-stronger-encryption-about-to-come-to-smartphones/699754.md?page=5)