@ISIDEWITHQuestionsNational securityStarted 10mos agoActive 2 days ago

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

Backdoor access means that tech companies would create a way for government authorities to bypass encryption, allowing them to access private communications for surveillance and investigation. Proponents argue that it helps law enforcement and intelligence agencies prevent terrorism and criminal activities by providing necessary access to information. Opponents argue that it compromises user privacy, weakens overall security, and could be exploited by malicious actors.

+
Expand
+ Settings

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 841 India voters.

47%
Yes
53%
No
47%
Yes
53%
No

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 841 India voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 841 India voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from India voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @B3R65MCanswered…2 days2D

Yes, but the government should access it only when required(like for crime investigation, terrorism and other security issues)

 @B324B78answered…4wks4W

Yes, however they should compensate (monetarily) the company and any specific employees assisting in the process of investigation, for their efforts and time.

 @B2FVHGPanswered…2mos2MO

yes for terrorist organisation or else with a court order

 @B2D2SQVanswered…2mos2MO

If it’s a high risk situation then yeah otherwise no or with permission

 @B296Q7Nanswered…2mos2MO

In ordinary circumstances , the government cannot infringe privacy and only in emergencies and prior information from agencies like courts and others are required before taking action

 @B274RY3answered…2mos2MO

It depends upon the situation. If the threat is high, then it can be allowed.

 @B26CQKLanswered…3mos3MO

Let the govt go to court and should really be able to prove that that would yield god information. Privacy is important No government overreact should be allowed

 @9ZMSDZCanswered…4mos4MO

Only if it is tightly regulated and deemed necessary for national security

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

House Democrats Filibuster Flip-Flop: Keep It When the GOP’s in Charge, Kill It When We Are

Filibuster for me, but not for thee. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), an outspoken critic of the Senate filibuster, indicated Monday that she will not support axing the procedural hurdle as long as Republicans control the White House and both houses of Congress. “Am I championing getting rid of the filibuster now when the Senate has the trifecta? No,” the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus said at a press conference on Capitol Hill. “But had we had the trifecta, I would have been, because we have to show that government can deliver,” Jayapal added. The Senate filibuster rule, which requires a 60-vote threshold to end debate and pass most types of legislation in the upper chamber, is seen as the best chance Democrats have at blocking the adoption of President-elect Donald Trump agenda – with Republicans taking a 53-47 seat advantage in the Senate and expected to retain a slim majority in the House. Jayapal, as recently as September, was pushing to “abolish” what she called the “Jim Crow filibuster.” “The filibuster was originally created *by mistake* in 1806,” she wrote on X. “Every day we don’t abolish it is just as big a mistake.”The Washington Democrat dislikes that the procedural tool makes it difficult for progressives to ram their agenda through Congress. “It’s the filibuster OR an assault weapons ban. It’s the filibuster OR codified abortion access. It’s the filibuster OR raising the minimum wage. It’s the filibuster OR protecting voting rights. The choice is clear. Abolish the Jim Crow filibuster,” Jayapal tweeted. The progressive rep argued Monday that passing a liberal agenda would’ve “built some trust with the American people.”“If we had had control of the trifecta and gotten rid of the filibuster to pass minimum wage, to pass paid sick leave, to pass many of these things that are passing – abortion access – that are passing on ballot measures that are so popular … then I think we would have built some trust with the American people,” Jayapal argued.

▲  226 replies