Yet, you wouldn't object to the government having access to 100% of them. The lack of knowledge of how any of this works is just astonishing.
Maybe you should educate me. Here's what I've said:
But I don't think the bill would be any more silly than the idea that devices need to be absolutely impenetrably secure in the first place. "Really rough ridin' hard to break into" is a sufficient standard.
The security field is ever evolving in the IT world. It takes an army of people to keep up with hackers and people that want to steal our data.
Retailers like Target and Home Depot probably thought 'good enough' was fine for their customers security.
https://securityintelligence.com/the-top-5-retail-breaches/The fact remains that good enough, is not secure. Retailers use websites, that are built for e-commerce, to interact with consumers. That is one portal for hackers to target. Now think about using the very device consumers use to access those sites. Not only do you open up the people that shop, but also every single person that uses that device.
Apple recently said they now have over a billion active devices around the world.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/26/10835748/apple-devices-active-1-billion-iphone-ipad-iosSo, instead of the 300+ million people that could potentially visit Targets site, which maybe 10% do a year, you have 10x that.
Some of those people have nothing to do with those retailers, but because they simply have the device that runs the same software as the other billion, they are at risk. Creating a back door for the government may seem like a way to protect us, but it opens us up even more to attack.
