Unrolled

Prof. Aiken, your tweet denies that people can think or say one thing in private, versus another publicly; in fact it seems to deny privacy whatsoever.

Something private is not "beyond the rule of law", it is merely private. The law already knows this:

3 aims in society: Privacy, Collective Security & Vitality of the Tech Sector – none should have primacy over the other
We cannot deliver on collective security when there exist #encrypted entities beyond the rule of law?@fipman @Europol #SafetyTech
https://t.co/YOir5WMgAb

— Prof. Mary Aiken (@maryCyPsy) September 13, 2021

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 already recognises that sometimes it is necessary and proportionate for the law to demand decryption, and provides for that.

How, then, can encrypted data be "beyond the law?"

https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000/Part_III

Originally tweeted by Alec Muffett (@AlecMuffett) on 2021/09/13.