Re: The problem is...
>>"The industry doesn't need crypto and it won't give us proper crypto in a time when selling the data of your users, or even mining it for yourself is seen as something acceptable"
Not sure what you consider "The industry" to be, but big business absolutely needs strong encryption. It is vital to ours and other companies. Not just banking, etc., but any respectable large corporation. Google et al. may not have a vital need for it when they're giving you free email, but the professional world absolutely needs and wants this.
I could, but can't, give you numerous examples of industrial espionage. And don't think that companies are happy about having to let the government have access, either. I know personally of two large contracts that US firms have lost recently due to not being able to provide assurance to European customers that the US government wont have access to their data. The Microsoft Ireland case is merely the most well-known of the current crop. Government access is also sometimes subverted - either complicity or otherwise meaning that even were a company happy to allow the governments to monitor for purposes of national security, one cannot trust that this will only be used for such purposes. An example of complicit subversion is when Raytheon used information acquired by US intelligence to out-bid a European rival. An example of uncomplicit subversion would be when the tools used for monitoring phone calls were hijacked by foreign parties without the operators' knowledge in the case of the Vodafone network being compromised to listen in on the phone calls of the Greek prime-minister and others for over a year. The hackers simply made use of the existing spying technology and turned it on their targets of choice.
So I honestly have no idea what you're talking about when you say "the industry has no need of encryption" or that "they will not give it to us". It honestly sounds like paranoid ravings of someone who sees "Us" the people vs. "Them" big business and just thinks of Gmail et al. Strong Encryption without government backdoors is very much wanted by "the industry" for anything other than a very small subset of businesses. And even Google want it for their own use, even if not to deploy with your email account.
That's why what Cameron wants is nonsense. (Well, that and human rights, I guess).
Biting the hand that feeds IT
