Hmmm, I'm not sure that creating new technology on top of what we currently have will make any difference. Currently, TCP/IP is a very simple end-to-end mechanism, which is why it's so easy to work with it. If you enforce encryption, you're violating that principle and causing a lot of headaches. It's much more a matter of legislation and infrastructure, I think, than of technology itself. Refusing to sell surveillance equipment to these authoritarian states would already be a good first step.
> Currently, TCP/IP is a very simple end-to-end mechanism, which is why it's so easy to work with it.
I agree, and it makes a lot of sense to have a "world of ends" (http://www.worldofends.com/) where all the intelligence is at the ends of the network rather than in the network infrastructure.
> If you enforce encryption, you're violating that principle and causing a lot of headaches.
I'm not tlaking about having a law that enforces encryption. Instead I think services should be created that make it dead easy to use encryption, and computers/tablets/mobile phones should come with these facilities out of the box.
> It's much more a matter of legislation and infrastructure, I think, than of technology itself.
Infrastructure is technology, so I'm not sure what point you're making. Imagine if every laptop sold in the west came as standard with hardware and software that enabled ad hoc mesh networking, switched on by default. (This would enable a city-wide ad hoc anonymous network). Then imagine that lots of services in the west were bult around this technology, and that you have whole ecosystems of protocols which relied on it. Then autocracies would have to forgo all these services and ecosystems, or build their own alternatives.
sorry, my "infrastructure" was vague. I meant ISPs, traffic hubs, physical cables, etc. The stuff that gets tampered with before it actually hits your PC.
