Tho a counter-point can be made to the end that communication providers have been mandated to give law-enforcement special surveillance access for decades already, when most of it was analog. In most countries, these laws are still in effect, and in many there are very much like "API specifications".
On that end there's the inherent expectation of "If we can do it with analog phone, why can't we do it with digital?" by law&order politics. Another big part is also the false assumption that people have a perfect right to privacy.
In theory, people may have a right to privacy, but in practice, communication providers which actually facilitate communication are also bound by government actions [0].
On that end there's the inherent expectation of "If we can do it with analog phone, why can't we do it with digital?" by law&order politics. Another big part is also the false assumption that people have a perfect right to privacy.
In theory, people may have a right to privacy, but in practice, communication providers which actually facilitate communication are also bound by government actions [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter