> The point he's making is if they enact this law, it will be trivial for anyone that cares to bypass if it is implemented as described.
I took that as a given and therefore described what I would see as scan-creep of the gov implementation regardless of the exact verbiage of the law.
My point was that anyone expecting to use the file type as a loophole would likely ne compromised, and the only way to ensure bypass of the scan would be to locally encrypt before transmission, as any text or binary entered into an app affected by this law should be assumed to be fully mined, scanned, and reported to the gov regardless of its contents.
I took that as a given and therefore described what I would see as scan-creep of the gov implementation regardless of the exact verbiage of the law.
My point was that anyone expecting to use the file type as a loophole would likely ne compromised, and the only way to ensure bypass of the scan would be to locally encrypt before transmission, as any text or binary entered into an app affected by this law should be assumed to be fully mined, scanned, and reported to the gov regardless of its contents.