Asymmetric cryptography isn't a rocket science. Airline keeps encrypted recording and public key, certain government institution keeps private key, you need both to decrypt.
This violates rule 1 by requiring a government institution to keep a private key: no change to how current regulations or laws work or to how current workstreams outside of the secondary backup system work (i.e., no change is required like having the judiciary start using crypto)
This violates rule 2 by not assuring that a warrant is necessary because somebody at the government institution has the private key (assuming that institution is not the judge): It should be technologically impossible for any person or entity to access the data without a warrant
> It should be technologically impossible for any person or entity to access the data without a warrant
I don’t understand why you’d impose restrictions on this system that do not exist elsewhere? What makes cockpit voice recordings sensitive enough to warrant more secure storage than people’s bank accounts?
abduhl|2 years ago
This violates rule 2 by not assuring that a warrant is necessary because somebody at the government institution has the private key (assuming that institution is not the judge): It should be technologically impossible for any person or entity to access the data without a warrant
Aeolun|2 years ago
I don’t understand why you’d impose restrictions on this system that do not exist elsewhere? What makes cockpit voice recordings sensitive enough to warrant more secure storage than people’s bank accounts?
DrNosferatu|2 years ago