Should the government require tech companies to provide backdoor access to encrypted communications for national security purposes?

Yes

Only in particularly serious national security situations

Only if the person there investigating has done a major crime like human trafficking or drug trafficking

Yes, but access should be restricted and justified

Yes, if you are a convicted. Murderer, mass drug trafficker and human trafficker, You should lose your right to autonomy.

It depends on the situation, it should be available but not free to use

No, the government should not have access to private communications between individuals, but tech companies should be legally required to have algorithms in place that can flag communications which detail or discuss a potential national security threat or threat to public safety and these communications should require mandatory reporting following review by a real person.

The government should not be able to encrypt any communications that they want to, unless it can be proven that it is in the interest of national security

No, but tech companies should be legally required to report suspicious activity to the government to ensure national security.

This would be only if there was a genuine and grave risk and would have to be in accordance with law. Getting permission to do this in each instance can't just be a rubber stamping exercise. I don't see a need for this right now but recognize there could be circumstances where it's needed.

Yes, but as this implies government surveillance of the public, this should come with independent oversight to ensure that abuses of power don’t occur.

If it aligns with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter in re geographical restrictions and serious threat to public security

Depends on what you mean by security purposes, as we’ve learned from the last few years government worldwide use tech platforms to spy, censor and influence angendas whilst dismissing others

Yes but within strict regulations against misuse and only used in the most serious of threats to life

Yes but only in extreme cases, and it should be highly regulated as to what constitutes as an extreme case.

Depending on the information they’re looking for. People still need their privacy but if it might save someone’s life or get justice for their life i agree with it

Yes, but not constant access, only in the case of an incident has occurred and they have to look into any persons involved and their activity online.

Yes, but only if there is a sufficient level of data privacy and encryption to fend off would-be attackers, and only to assist with ongoing legal proceedings.

No, and we should have an amendment against such invasion of privacy.

Not a routine backdoor. But access with court order

Yes, but only if it is for someone who is a threat to our country.

yes, but only the military or anti corruption task forces should have access to this.

It has to be shared between third parties and government institutions in terms of quality of service to be ensured by inspections each other

No. If it’s for national security reasons, then we won’t need a back door. It’ll be breached regardless.

How would you feel if your personal messages could be read by someone else, even if it was for national security?

How do you balance your right to privacy with the needs of the community for safety and security?

If given a choice, would you opt in or out of allowing surveillance access to your digital communications, and why?

Do you believe there's a way to provide security agencies the information they need without violating individual privacy?

Reflecting on historical abuses of power, how do you feel about giving authorities more access to private communications?

Would you trust your government with a 'key' to everyone's private messages, under strict regulations and oversight?

If you had to design a system, how would you ensure authorities could fight crime and terrorism without overstepping into unnecessary surveillance?

Is there a point where you believe national security measures can go too far in accessing personal information?

What are your thoughts on sacrificing some privacy for the sake of potentially preventing crime or terrorism?

Can you think of a time when you would have wanted law enforcement to have more access to information to solve a crime?