Please stop doing this. My argument isn&#x27;t that bulk electronic surveillance has been valuable for law enforcement. I don&#x27;t think it is. I don&#x27;t think most law enforcement agencies do either, because relative to the <i>enormous</i> amount of foreign SIGINT work the US does, it does virtually no evidence collection for domestic cases through dragnet surveillance.<p>My issue is that universal default unbreakable encryption doesn&#x27;t just break dragnet surveillance, but also breaks discovery and evidence recovery done under a warrant in routine investigations. It is in fact hard to break dragnet surveillance without harming routine law enforcement, and I think people should be clearer about that tradeoff.<p>It also isn&#x27;t my contention that harming routine investigations means that crypto should be backdoored. Despite what you said upthread, I&#x27;m going to hazard that I&#x27;ve done more work to help foil attempts to break crypto than you have. My bona fides here are established, no matter how you choose to misread my comments. It really bothers me when people erroneously suggest that I support crypto backdoors. It doesn&#x27;t help that the first thing I wrote on this very thread said exactly that.