EU citizens’ rights are under threat from anti-encryption proposals
In society there are always competing rights and duties to be balanced. Rights very rarely absolute.<p>In this case the right to privacy has to be balanced with the need in society for the law to be enforced and police investigations to be carried out.<p>There are never been &quot;end-to-end&quot; unbreakable privacy. People have a right to privacy so their private communications are kept private but at the same time the police has always been able to access those communications should it be necessary and according to the law. Claiming that an &#x27;intact&#x27; right to privacy means an absolute right to absolute privacy is simply not how it has ever been.<p>Strong end-to-end encryption essentially means that the police cannot access communications ever, even if they get a warrant because they don&#x27;t have a technical mean to do so. That&#x27;s quite reasonably something that is deemed a problem. How do we deal with this?