Backdoor access means that tech companies would create a way for government authorities to bypass encryption, allowing them to access private communications for surveillance and investigation. Proponents argue that it helps law enforcement and intelligence agencies prevent terrorism and criminal activities by providing necessary access to information. Opponents argue that it compromises user privacy, weakens overall security, and could be exploited by malicious actors.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Political party:
Voting for candidate:
No, but there should be a process whereby such access can be granted if the appropriate federal warrant is given and ONLY for matters of national security.
@9TYJFHK6mos6MO
There's no such thing.
Either the backdoor exists, or it doesn't. There is no way to make a "secure backdoor" which hackers can't abuse.
Keeping a copy of the cryptographic keys is an option, and any company which does so ought to be required to comply with warrants and such.
@9RBBBSQ 8mos8MO
Yes, but access should only be granted in the case of emergencies (it should not be always accessible)
Only in the use of a committed crime and if there is credible information of threats that would put lives in danger
@9V6XJKR6mos6MO
It is not possible to have secure encryption system and a "back-door" at the same time. The two are fundamentally at odds with one another.
@HumanR1ghtsGaryDemocrat6mos6MO
Even Fort Knox has a key to enter
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
What are your thoughts on sacrificing some privacy for the sake of potentially preventing crime or terrorism?
@9TS5G7LIndependent6mos6MO
I think it violates our rights and not only do I think that I believe this issue of our country shall and will not be stripped that includes the people of the United States of America
I think that the privacy of the average, innocent person should not be compromised in order to conduct surveillance.
@DylanJMcCombs03Socialist 4mos4MO
No, this infringes dangerously on an individual's right to privacy and has the potential for serious misuse.
@9SV9J3J6mos6MO
While it could be helpful, it would be taking away privacy and security which could be used corruptly by those in power.
@9PZ2HB59mos9MO
No, the government should have their own tech to do so or give tech companies the option and negotiate a deal with tech companies so that they are fairly compensated.
@B3S9LFV3 days3D
Yes, but with very restricted access, they should only be able to access the network in cases of national threats.
@B3RTBHN4 days4D
No, it can be misused by bad actors which risks exposing billions of individual user data to anybody online
@7WDP6PTIndependent 6 days6D
Yes, but if they use this system to spy on Americans this violates the constitution from the lack of having a warrant or a good justification to do so
@B3DQ3WH2wks2W
I would say no until they are certain something will happen because it defeats the purpose of privacy
@B3CKMQY2wks2W
They can make a backdoor access but only use it on people who seem suspicious. But for people who have a very clean record, then leave them alone
@B3BWFHH2wks2W
Yes, so long as the government notifies the tech company beforehand unless it is a direct threat to our national security.
@B3BC32M2wks2W
They should not be required to provide backdoor access to encrypted communications, unless something serious were to happen
@B39Y6CV2wks2W
Yes, but only for suspected criminals or spies, including other politicians, anyone else would be a violation of privacy and the common citizen should have the right to file a lawsuit.
@B394FJT3wks3W
Only during times of emergency when we know that whatever people are saying in a chat will cause imminent harm to the citizens of the United States
@B375CP53wks3W
Yes, but the government should have strict oversight and clear limitations. If backdoor access is granted for national security purposes, it must be carefully controlled to prevent abuse. There should be transparent processes, regular audits, and legal safeguards to ensure it’s only used for legitimate threats and not to infringe on personal privacy or civil rights.
@B368LSL3wks3W
Yes, but only in the use of a committed crime and if there is credible information of threats that would put lives in danger
@B35ZF6Z3wks3W
Yes, but only to an certain extent due to protection from the violation of the government knowing everyone's business
@B35NFRQProgressive3wks3W
Yes, only for individuals that have undeniable proof that they have or will commit an act of terrorism or crime.
@B2X4CT91mo1MO
If it is in the name of National Security yes but for anything else no protect the people's privacy.
@B2WWRWWWomen’s Equality1mo1MO
No, since it can be made more accessible for hackers to get into the program, but it also infringes on the citizens' rights.
@kigyarx18Independent 1mo1MO
No, such requests should require a warrant or court order on a case-by-case basis, as with other undue invasions of privacy.
@B2VVB3Z1mo1MO
I think it is a good idea for the most part, but at some point, they're going to use it for the wrong reasons.
@B2TZCSTIndependent1mo1MO
No, they should be open source to begin with. Only sensitive personal data should be encrypted and the individual should have access to their own encrypted profile
@B2SXHLQ1mo1MO
it should be a option for tech companies to do this. It should never be forced, and tech companies should be required to disclose this to users.
No, but allow to an independent anti-corruption organization of people that are truly good 100% if the encrypted communication is in any way a true threat to the people. Could be to Anonymous.
@B2KHNPK 2mos2MO
Information shouldn't be provided freely to the government as that could lead to misuses, but the government should be granted access upon warrant.
Yes, but only for the sake of its intended use, and there should be tight regulations to ensure the government does not violate our privacy or infringe on our individual freedoms.
@B2GLJWRPeace and Freedom2mos2MO
No, the government would technically be violating the 4th amendment, and can ask tech companies for permission
Depends on reasoning, for instance if suspicious activity occurs then back doors should be considered to open, otherwise it is not the states business.
@ArghhGeeDub 2mos2MO
No, though tech companies should be provided indices of keywords that trigger a chain of automated review to determine if the likelihood of a threat to national security or violent crimes are greater than a certain threshold, then submit it to a federal panel for manual review and possible further investigation. only applicable to national security or crimes that immediately threaten the lives and well-beings of person other than the sender.
@B2DD7QC2mos2MO
Yes, but only to monitor foreign NOT domestic communications or with specific FISA court approvals for suspected domestic national security threats
@B2D3ZX72mos2MO
No, but there should be a process where permission can be accepted so that privacy can still be a thing.
@B2BJMSP2mos2MO
No, this creates a slippery slope towards authoritarian government control and tyranny, and provides opportunities for hackers to misuse backdoor access.
@B27RB8M2mos2MO
Yes all tech companies should have them, but the government can only use them with a court order or in an emergency.
giving the government backdoor access to encrypted communications could help catch criminals and stop threats. but it also means less privacy and security for everyone, as hackers could exploit these backdoors.
@9ZYL5B83mos3MO
No, they shouldn't require tech companies to provide backdoor access but if asked and the tech companies themselves offer it then it can be used.
I think that national security should have their own thing that is encrypted to not open any doors to anyone.
@9ZTQ9DB 4mos4MO
Overall, no because it infringes on the right to privacy. However, if a warrant is acquired then yes. This could also be achieved by requiring tech companies to give up information when presented with a warrant.
@9YJ4XTD4mos4MO
providing law enforcement with the tools to intercept and decrypt messages will lead to increased security risks and grave human rights violations
@9YH9CK2Constitution4mos4MO
No, in no circumstance should the government have the ability to backdoor any encrypted communications
@9Y7SXCH 4mos4MO
Yes. I think they should require the ability for all companies BUT should only be used if there are warrants, etc. They should never just have cartblanche access.
@9Y5QW9JIndependent4mos4MO
No, not backdoor access, but there should be a way to legally obtain access with justified suspicions
@9YBR4LH4mos4MO
Same reason as said above. Yes, to track terrorist, but don’t sit here and watch people wanting to watch porn and out their business if someone has a power trip and whats to buy someone’s encrypted sites to out them to the public for embarrass them. What we do on our own and without bodily and emotionally harming anyone should be left alone. Use it to find your bad guys.
@9MGKS4XConstitution 4mos4MO
No, the Constitution guarantees privacy. This information is too easy for the government to abuse, or to get compromised by hackers.
@9Y6C69N4mos4MO
no because that can lead to hackers having a quicker way in and a secure and fast way in and it can lead to company data or personal data getting stolen.
@9Y4XKHR4mos4MO
This one is a tricky one as it completely violates ones privacy regardless of the individual and can be used against its own citizens, assuming it isn't already being monitored.
@9XV7LL24mos4MO
if their is a threat then yes then the government can use tech companies to provide backdoor access to communications for national security
@9XN5C3M4mos4MO
Yes, as long as the tech companies have a say in next steps in an effort to prevent damage to their reputation
@9XL8B4B4mos4MO
No, the government should not spy on citizens of the USA; there should be a requirement for tech companies to inform the government of any threat related to national security
@9XKVCP24mos4MO
it shouldn't't have a back door option for hackers to potentially exploite but their should be a way to access an account it a way hackers wouldn't be able too
@9XGNW4M4mos4MO
Should the government require tech companies to comply with federal and state laws and pay their fair share of taxes?
@mdemars88 4mos4MO
Backdoor access should only be allowed after specific government agencies receive a warrant from a judge.
@9XG5Y6DRepublican4mos4MO
Yes but only to a certain extent. They should only have access if they ask the company first and if they have a certain reason to look through it.
@9XF8X2S4mos4MO
Absolutely not, and the government should be not even able to ask. If that doesn't happen then the service provider must somehow securely disclose to the public in a way that doesn't advance hacking, how many backdoors they have and what the nature of it is, and what data could be exposed. <-- that's not realistically possible, because it opens the doors to hackers.
@9XDL2K34mos4MO
Yes, but only for specific individuals who intelligence determines are a threat to national security. The privacy of lawful American citizens must be preserved.
@9XCDFJY4mos4MO
Yes, but government should provide probable cause agreed on by the supreme court and not have access without that
@9XBSDMP4mos4MO
No, any "backdoor" implemented into encrypted communications can be exploited by more people than just our government
@9X9RQ8QRepublican4mos4MO
Yes, but only ones in which find prevelant information that could be a threat to safety, as to not infringe on peoples privacy
@9X84GFL4mos4MO
This should only be utilized in cases where there is a preponderance of evidence that one of the parties has done something illegal
@9X38T425mos5MO
Yes, but only when the government can demonstrate clear probable cause to believe the individual is a threat to national security or has committed or plotted to commit an act of terrorism.
@9WP4P89 5mos5MO
Yes, but in the form of a key that is stored analog rather than digitally and is changed periodically
@9WNMKBKProgressive5mos5MO
They shouldn't require every tech company to provide it, but if they NEED it (if it would help with figuring out criminal offenses), then they should require it.
@9WKZH9P5mos5MO
Tricky. Needed for nefarious actors at times, but don’t trust the government and current administration not to misuse and abuse authority.
@9WDVYSG5mos5MO
Yes, so long as the government can maintain the security of these encrypted communications should tech companies provide backdoor access.
@igeryuIndependent 5mos5MO
No, outside of clear and obvious illegal activity, security does not warrant the reduction in privacy
@9WDCB775mos5MO
Yes, but only if related to international terrorist organizations. It cannot be used to target US citizens.
@9WDBXBY5mos5MO
I think that this should only be needed if a person says something and its flagged for possible terrorism but otherwise, no they shouldn't
@9WD8P8Q5mos5MO
no, but if you possibly have information that would assist them and they ask for it, you must give it.
@9WB26PP5mos5MO
No, as the government officials reviewing these encrypted communications could be corrupt and misuse them. However, if it is guaranteed that the viewers of these communications are trustworthy, then yes.
@9W4CRXT5mos5MO
Should be decided by what type of company, for example, a communications company should provide backdoor access; however a company in the area of energies, should not be required to, as it is not needing of encrypted communicaitons.
@9W3B8L85mos5MO
No. Ask any computer/online security professional, and they will tell you that WILL be hacked and WILL end poorly. Please consider a different method such as specifying privacy laws and warrants. A backdoor is VERY unsafe, but a record that can only be accessed with the physical phone in hand is a better (and secure) option.
@9VZHM9QPeace and Freedom 5mos5MO
Absolutely not. This is a worse invasion of privacy, they should NEED some sort of warrant and/or approval.
@9VZ7VX35mos5MO
No, this could be a potential backdoor that foreign hackers use daily to gather information against us
@9VYJSQD5mos5MO
Only after the government has physically seized the device or when the government has undeniable evidence of a national security risk that those communications would assist in operations against.
@9VX3XSF5mos5MO
No , however the government should require the tech company to unencrypt the information when called to do so.
@9VVL9PY 5mos5MO
if the company is grossing a lot and add to our GDP the government should have access to check on the company’s integrity
@9VRJMDB5mos5MO
Yes, but only if they are certain that the individual is planning something that is a threat to national securtity.
@9VNKGY9Independent5mos5MO
Yes, but whoever has access to the backdoor needs to be heavily monitored to ensure nothing shady happens with the information.
@9VKWSLD5mos5MO
No, they shouldn't have to force any companies let them choose if they want to give access it shouldn't be required.
@9VJ3C6M5mos5MO
Yes as long regulations on how deep of an access it can be and internet safety is placed as a priority as well.
@9VD93445mos5MO
O governo não deve exigir mas sim comprar essas informações. No entanto, em casos de claro risco de segurança nacional, o presidente pode emitir uma ordem executiva que obrigue essas empresas a cederem temporariamente os dados das pessoas em questão
@9VD4W375mos5MO
No, this could infringe on the privacy rights of American citizens and should only be used if a warrant has been issued.
@9VCKGVS 5mos5MO
Yes, but it should only be able to use after demonstrating probable cause or during national emergencies
@9V9XPXHIndependent5mos5MO
yes, but with exceptionally stringent requirements to gain access with public access after a period of time.
@9V7TQF46mos6MO
This depends on whether national security is truly at stake. If not, then the government needs to stay out of privately owned businesses' business.
@9V6QDSK6mos6MO
Only if required for national security by a valid threat or act of treason by a US citizen, such as Donald Trump and all the co-conspirators that supported January 6 riot and to overthrow the 2020 election.
@9V5Y6L76mos6MO
Only if national security purposes are publicly well-defined and not some amorphous way to snoop on ordinary citizens.
@9V53YRZ6mos6MO
No, there is a reason why the acts passed after 9/11 never truly stuck because this is an invasion on ones privacy.
@9V4DN9M6mos6MO
Yes, but there should be proper procedures in place and extra security measures. The more backdoors we have accessible, the more possibilities we also give hackers. Additional protective features and a thorough process whereby such access can be granted if the appropriate federal warrant is given and ONLY for matters of national security should be implemented.
@9V2Y7MF6mos6MO
I think that they can if there is a probable cause like murder or something but if you didn't do anything then no.
@9V2VMKCIndependent6mos6MO
Yes but to an extent because they could possibly take advantage of this and use these resources outside of nations security reasons.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
