zlacker

Right now it is politically unthinkable for Western governments to demand people install MITM root CAs, and technically infeasible that they would re-encrypt every TLS connection (and check for encryption being layered inside the decrypted streams). (When Kazakhstan tried, they also faced resistance from software makers, but I wonder what would happen if those software makers happened to be based in the same country that was implementing this policy.)

It is much more thinkable, however, especially in 5 years, perhaps after a (false flag?) cyber-attack takes down an electricity grid in some country, that a government could prevent "insecure"/"unpatched" devices from going online. This wouldn't require any personal information to be shared with the government (at least, no more than current ISP data retention laws already require), and Microsoft would be all too happy to build support for this right into Windows for free, as it would make it harder for "unapproved" operating systems to be used in that country.

> the tickets are invalid if you weren't the one driving

I guess what I meant was "the government will punish you unless you can prove someone else was using your device" so you won't be able to escape prosecution by sharing a device and saying "I can't remember who was using it at that time". Similarly, I believe in some jurisdictions a car owner is expected to know who was using their car at any given point in the past so that speeding tickets can be assigned to the correct person.*

Anyway, I can imagine the law going further and matching the dystopian vision of "The Right to Read", which includes this passage: "Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students, regardless of what she had used it for. School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action. It didn't matter whether you did anything harmful — the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you."

* "It is also illegal [in the UK] to decline to provide the driver's details, whether it was you or another person." https://news.jardinemotors.co.uk/how-to/speeding-fine-faqs-w...

>>dane-p+(OP)
> Right now it is politically unthinkable for Western governments to demand people

Well now you hit the nail on the head. The issue hasn't been technical for a long time but rather one of "image". People have to still believe they have freedoms and whatever curtails them is for their own good. As long as you're given a good reason to submit to extreme measures (9/11 made the Patriot Act acceptable), or they happen slowly enough that you can't really see a boundary being crossed, these measures will eventually be put in place. And nobody will see a huge difference because they won't remember a time when it was hugely different.