> If anyone inside US borders is off limits, wouldn't it be a great place for terrorists to set up shop? Completely no surveillance in US borders, win win!
The idea isn’t that you can’t surveil within the US. The idea is routine traffic snooping is off limits. A warrant and a fair bit of effort should be required. The less effort required to wiretap, the closer we get to a surveillance state. Which is why trying to nurf IOT encryption is deeply wrong. It weakens freedom within the country, and makes a country week to outside attacks. Lose-lose.
However, crypto doesn't abide by warrants. So many people read into my comment thinking that I'm supporting a surveillance state. I am not. I simply am talking about how it is, indeed, complicated.
Crypto doesn't care about warrants. The problem is complicated.
The fact that you can even talk about warrants in a crypto conversation sort of irks me to be honest. Warrants are meaningless in crypto conversations. Not just meaningless, but incompatible.
Don't argue points I'm not trying to make please. I'd delete my original comment if I could -_-
Crypto doesn't respect warrants, but if the government can't break your crypto, they can still install a physical keylogger - provided they go get a warrant.
Warrants aren't relevant if we're talking about crypto, but warrants are relevant if we're talking about surveillance.
The idea isn’t that you can’t surveil within the US. The idea is routine traffic snooping is off limits. A warrant and a fair bit of effort should be required. The less effort required to wiretap, the closer we get to a surveillance state. Which is why trying to nurf IOT encryption is deeply wrong. It weakens freedom within the country, and makes a country week to outside attacks. Lose-lose.