On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:41:21 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
'US Attorney General William Barr today launched a new front in the feds' ongoing fight against consumer encryption, railing against the common security practice and lamenting the "victims" in its wake.'
Has he changed his mind <https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/08/attorney_genera.html>? If one already has an effective level of security say, by way of illustration, one that protects against 99 percent of foreseeable threats -- is it reasonable to incur massive further costs to move slightly closer to optimality and attain a 99.5 percent level of protection? A company would not make that expenditure; nor should society. Here, some argue that, to achieve at best a slight incremental improvement in security, it is worth imposing a massive cost on society in the form of degraded safety. This is untenable. Schneier notes: The final thing I noticed about the speech is that it is not about iPhones and data at rest. It is about communications -- data in transit. The "going dark" debate has bounced back and forth between those two aspects for decades. It seems to be bouncing once again.