Adding to this, has anybody else noticed just how much encryption is being mentioned in news articles and talk shows about Paris? In articles and discussions on TV it&#x27;s always in a fear-mongering tone: &quot;They communicated with encrypted messages!&quot;<p>I mean yes, that poses a problem. But the solution isn&#x27;t to antagonize encryption. Should we all send our letters without envelopes? Why are people ready and willing to do that online and not offline when the same information is FAR more likely to be intercepted by crazy criminals? How much <i>potential</i> exposure does your data get via snail mail versus Internet transmission?<p>Ignoring any sort of conspiracy theories I think despite the subtlety it is still blatantly obvious that politicians are immediately taking advantage of the situation, associating negativity (terrorism) with encryption.<p>It is a VERY dangerous time because emotions of people can be swayed in any direction now. It is the same phenomenon observed when the Patriot Act was enacted.<p>Discussions and discourse are discouraged because it isn&#x27;t considered moral to talk about these things less than a week after these horrifying attacks. NOW is the time to stab the pro-encryption arguments right in the heart, charged with emotion, in a subtle and covert way.