Well, HOPEFULLY, the western governments pushing for exactly the same thing might think twice now. Any breach in the Chinese system would also be beneficial in highlighting even more flaws in the concept.
From that page: "there is currently no law regarding key disclosure in the United States" (nor is there in plenty other countries).
This an area under very heavy active debate at the legal and political levels and that fact might change in a year. There have also been numerous cases where the lack of such law hasn't prevented agencies for requesting the decrypted data itself, in lieu of the keys. But it's not quite a done thing just yet. So if you oppose key disclosure, there are still plenty of chances to fight it at the political level in many countries.
Sure most of us disagree with what "fucking_tragedy" is saying, he doesn't offer evidence, and it stems from a weak line of reasoning. But we shouldn't bury it just because we disagree with it.
Even though I side with encryption, I think it's worth at least exploring the other side's argument.
Does access to encryption give increased capability to China in such a way that it "profits" in matters of national security / finance / etc. Or will such a move ultimately "cost" China due to the side effects of weaker technological infrastructure, privacy, etc?
Will it be a detriment to the United States (assuming current government snooping laws remain the same)?
I think the answers to these, while they can be theorized and predicted, will best be fleshed out in due time, hopefully influencing US politicians to make the right decision.
I'm glad that you're arguing with that particular interpretation of my comment in good faith. It is refreshing to see.
However, what I meant to convey is this: despite the obvious problems with such a program, the government sees value in control and centralization of the country's secure communications. If we ignore the obvious problems with "We have all the keys" & "Secure communication" and look to recent initiatives and programs with similar contradictory goals, we've been told by politicians that they were implemented because everyone else is doing it and it's necessary for national security.
I see how nonsensical this is, but if a similar program is pushed, this is how it would be pitched to the public.
It's the reason given to the public for having given the reins of our communication and technology infrastructure to intelligence and security agencies.
There are obvious reasons why the government would want to implement such a program, many of them having little to do with national security. Based on previous propaganda that's been fed to us over the past few years, this is the likely conclusion to be drawn.
