This is the key issue in this entire debate:<p><pre><code>    [T]he Government has ... violated the trust of the American people [and] broken
    the law themselves by already conducting wholesale surveillance of the citizenry
    ...
    Thus, the number one issue, the issue that should preempt all other issues,
    is how the government regains it&#x27;s credibility and re-establishes trust.
</code></pre>
Far too many people - even here on HN - are taking about the government&#x27;s order to Apple in isolation. The common arguments by the government and its supporters are based on the assumption that any action taken would be limited to the current situation.<p>Except this isn&#x27;t an isolated situation. The government has been fighting against the free use of encryption for decades. Saying the order given to Apple is limited to this single case is practically admitting ignorance (willful or not) about:<p>* The investigation of Phil Zimmermann and the export of PGP as a a &quot;munition&quot;<p>* Bernstein v. United States<p>* The Clipper Chip (Skipjack) and other key escrow systems of the fist crypto war<p>* &quot;Total Information Awareness&quot; (w&#x2F; John Poindexter of the Iran–Contra affair)<p>* The beam splitter in room 641A of AT&amp;T&#x27;s facility at 611 Folsom St.<p>* The illegalities brought to light by Daniel Ellsberg, William Binney, Thomas Drake, Edward Snowden, and other patriots that kept their oath to defend the constitution.<p>* How many public security standards were ruined as part of BULLRUN and related programs.<p>* The recently-discovered use of &quot;Stingray&quot; devices (&quot;IMSI-catchers&quot;) by the FBI.<p>* (I&#x27;ll just stop the here - there are many other examples that should be included)<p>These actions clearly show a pattern of trying to gain backdoor access or other surveillance capabilities. Yet some people suggest - usually without any evidence - that the government should be <i>trusted</i>. What, specifically, has the government been doing in the area of communication security that has justified <i>any</i> amount of trust? Actions are more important than promises.<p>It would be nice if this wasn&#x27;t such an adversarial relationship. Unfortunately, this <i>cold civil war</i> we are in where the government treating everyone as a potential criminal by default doesn&#x27;t leave us with a lot of options. Until we see real actions that regain some amount of the public&#x27;s trust, the <i>rational</i> approach has to be to not trust the government at all. To do otherwise is either ignorance of history or blind faith that the government never lies.