UK Government Readies Anti-Encryption Publicity Campaign to 'Keep Children Safe' Online

[sudo-sandwich]

Many have heard the term 'Guns are not the problem, it's the people that use them'. Well defenders of end to end encryption use the same, 'end to end encryption is not the problem, it's the people that use it'.

Both are right. Actually with encryption it's even more right because it's much easier to access illegal encryption than illegal guns.

 

[sudo-sandwich]

I have young nieces and nephews. Would I give up my right to privacy knowing that in doing so it would help keep them safer and make it easier to find and arrest child abusers? Yes, of course I would.

This isn't the tradeoff they're offering. Your options are privacy or no privacy, and kids will be just as endangered either way.

 

[sudo-sandwich]

Wait, you don't think the U.S. Government wants to do this? I guess you never heard of the Patriot Act.

Sure they want to do it, but they can't.

 

[laptech]

This isn't the tradeoff they're offering. Your options are privacy or no privacy, and kids will be just as endangered either way.

No they wouldn't because the more child abusers that get caught means more child stay safe, thus if removing end to end encryptions means affecting the privacy rights of others then so be it if it means more child abusers can get caught because they cannot hide behind end to end encryption. End result being more child being kept safe.

 

[LV426]

You can make all the different type of analogies all you want but at the end of the day it boils down to this, what is more important to you, your right to privacy or the right to protect the safety of children?

What is more important to you, your right to privacy or the right to invade everyone’s privacy on the pretext of protecting the safety of children?

 

[laptech]

What is more important to you, your right to privacy or the right to invade everyone’s privacy on the pretext of protecting the safety of children?

I have no problem giving up my rights to privacy if it means children can be kept safer from the hands of child molesters and sexual predators by having them caught because they can no longer hide behind end to end encryption. Do you have a problem with that?

 

[darkpaw]

Who are you going to replace them with? Labour wouldn't do any better once they're in power.

How do you know that? What you're suggesting here is that we should stick with this current bunch of corrupt Tory MPs, and never give anyone else a chance. Labour's Leader, Sir Keir Starmer, is a lawyer and was Director of Public Prosecutions. What was Bodger Johnson? Oh, well, he was a journalist, he lied to his bosses and got fired twice, he cheated on his wife while she had cancer, he won't tell us how many children he has, oh and he lied to the Queen!

I will put my tick in the box for Labour at the next General Election because at least they're the party of helping society rather than their mates and the 0.1%.

 

[Shirasaki]

I have young nieces and nephews. Would I give up my right to privacy knowing that in doing so it would help keep them safer and make it easier to find and arrest child abusers? Yes, of course I would.

Great, to protect children, now we need to sacrifice EVERYBODY ELSE's online safety.

I think the math checks out perfectly on this one. /s

Just to keep this in mind, pedophile/child abuse is just one type of crime.

 

[Shirasaki]

I have no problem giving up my rights to privacy if it means children can be kept safer from the hands of child molesters and sexual predators by having them caught because they can no longer hide behind end to end encryption. Do you have a problem with that?

If you are happy leaking your bank information (which has been encrypted for decades) and critical personal data in order to protect your kids, then sure.

 

[laptech]

Well looking at the majority of negative responses to the issue, I just hope and pray that none of you have to look a parent with young children in the eye and tell them that your right to privacy is more important than the safety of their child.

 

[laptech]

If you are happy leaking your bank information (which has been encrypted for decades) and critical personal data in order to protect your kids, then sure.

don't avoid the question. Is your own right to privacy more imporant than the safety of children, yes or no?

 

[LV426]

I have no problem giving up my rights to privacy if it means children can be kept safer from the hands of child molesters and sexual predators by having them caught because they can no longer hide behind end to end encryption. Do you have a problem with that?

It's not your privacy I'm worried about. You and your bank account can be hacked to kingdom come by scammers, blackmailers, identity thieves for all I care.

It's the rest of us that your wild scheme puts at grave risk, for the alleged benefit of being able to catch child molesters.

Every reasonable person wants child abuse to be rooted out and hunted down. I include myself in this group, speaking as someone who was abused as a youngster. But eavesdropping on all private conversations is not the right way to tackle the problem. You're dreaming if you think that UK government proposals will actually help. They will not.

 

[laptech]

It's not your privacy I'm worried about. You and your bank account can be hacked to kingdom come by scammers, blackmailers, identity thieves for all I care.

It's the rest of us that your wild scheme puts at grave risk, for the alleged benefit of being able to catch child molesters.

Every reasonable person wants child abuse to be rooted out and hunted down. I include myself in this group, speaking as someone who was abused as a youngster. But eavesdropping on all private conversations is not the right way to tackle the problem. You're dreaming if you think that UK government proposals will actually help. They will not.

And there lies the heart of the problem which no one in this thread is prepared to tackle and provide a direct answer for. People object to child abuse but they are not prepared to give up their privacy. So what's the answer? If the police cannot eavesdrop of conversations held between child abusers which would not only allow them to be captured but also means important evidence can be presented at trial, what is the alternative? Child abusers do use devices that use end to end encryption to they can avoid the police. How do you prevent that?

There appears to be no easy answer but the topic is not supposed to be an easy one either hence why there will be heated arguments on the subject.

 

[Duncan-UK]

So you’d rather “stick with the devil you know”? Without any disrespect with the exception of the Iraq war and PFI funding Labour did a hell of a lot better than the more than decade of Tory bliss we’ve had. National Debt? Higher, policing? Worse, NHS? Worse, education? Local school can’t even buy books now as an ‘academy’. Child poverty? Yep up. Tax? Up! The only thing they’ve done better is not poking as many foreign bears with sticks.

Not at all - I'm just thoroughly unconvinced by Labour - they've disappeared up woke black hole of identity politics.

 

[Shirasaki]

don't avoid the question. Is your own right to privacy more imporant than the safety of children, yes or no?

……
I’d say yes, because destroying privacy will NOT help saving children.

Now it’s time to answer my question, but I doubt it.

Whether you believe or not, I don’t support abusing children.

 

[laptech]

……
I’d say yes, because destroying privacy will NOT help saving children.

Now it’s time to answer my question, but I doubt it.

Whether you believe or not, I don’t support abusing children.

What, the question about bank data? The question is irrelevant to this debate. ask a relevant question and I will answer it.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Some people really don't care about privacy. Very annoying that this thread has no dislikes.

 

[VulchR]

The EU doesn't regulate as much as the the UK govt YET. There's no limit to Brussels' ambitions, and EU states (provinces is a better word) lose powers year by year. You're right of course about the motivations for Brexit, but leaving the EU is harder than getting rid of the Conservatives.

I guess I have a slightly jaded view of the UK national parties. On the whole I think the UK is well run, but then the government does something like trying to get rid of E2E and it makes me concerned. Also, I am not sure the other national parties are much better than the Conservatives. Each has compromised liberal values in their own way since I have lived in the UK. I like the pragmatic approach of the SNP (I live in Scotland), but it is not clear how they would govern if they were in charge of an independent Scotland.

 

[bigboy29]

"It's for the children!"

(Meanwhile, it's never for the children)

 

[Sophisticatednut]

You can make all the different type of analogies all you want but at the end of the day it boils down to this, what is more important to you, your right to privacy or the right to protect the safety of children?

Not at all. It’s a question of security for everyone or no security for everyone.

All pedophiles lock their doors, therefore we must make all locks illegal to use for kids safety… this doesn’t logically follow.

 

[Shirasaki]

Some people really don't care about privacy. Very annoying that this thread has no dislikes.

Just “angry” every thread that dislikes. Closest thing.
But yeah, they can give up privacy all they want but don’t drag everyone else with it.

 

[Shirasaki]

What, the question about bank data? The question is irrelevant to this debate. ask a relevant question and I will answer it.

Ok, so you think this change will LITERALLY only affect privacy. Good for you then. I’m done.
Enjoy your privacy-free life.

 

[bmustaf]

You can make all the different type of analogies all you want but at the end of the day it boils down to this, what is more important to you, your right to privacy or the right to protect the safety of children?

That's a false choice: the right to privacy does not require that we not protect children.

 

[bmustaf]

When you are personally affected by the harrowing prospect of a child of yours or a child relative of yours being sexually abused by their abusers and the police turn around and say 'sorry, there is nothing we can do to catch the abuser because we are unable to get into the end to end encryption the abuser was using, the right to privacy debate no longer has any relevance.

From the various UK investigations into child abuse it's a fact that abusers use devices that have end to end encryption to avoid detection and to avoid having their messages exposed because without enough evidence, the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) will not prosecute and the abusers know this. It is an extremely tough call to make, the right to privacy or the right to protect children.

I have young nieces and nephews. Would I give up my right to privacy knowing that in doing so it would help keep them safer and make it easier to find and arrest child abusers? Yes, of course I would.

Is banning e2e encryption really going to keep your niece & nephew safe? All the surveillance in the world cannot and will not replace involved parents & family, and will likely just create many more paths for your niece & nephew to be harmed now and in the future.

I have a niece & nephew I love dearly, too, but we rely on knowing where they are, what they're doing, who they're interacting with, and most of all, raising them as *thinking* humans who know what is and is not appropriate for anyone (family included) to ask of them and do to them rather than hoping the government will do the parenting/extended family job for us.

The research and empirical data of prevention of sexual abuse is clear: if you're relying on surveillance, you failed years before elsewhere (you can do everything right and still be a victim, not saying that, but I am saying that the numbers come way down when you rely on that rather than abdicate control to a government agency that does NOT have your best interests at heart). Teach children about their bodies, boundaries, and be active parents/family. Bad things may still happen, sure, but show me any perfect solution for anything...

 

[Shirasaki]

Is banning e2e encryption really going to keep your niece & nephew safe? All the surveillance in the world cannot and will not replace involved parents & family, and will likely just create many more paths for your niece & nephew to be harmed now and in the future.

I have a niece & nephew I love dearly, too, but we rely on knowing where they are, what they're doing, who they're interacting with, and most of all, raising them as *thinking* humans who know what is and is not appropriate for anyone (family included) to ask of them and do to them rather than hoping the government will do the parenting/extended family job for us.

The research and empirical data of prevention of sexual abuse is clear: if you're relying on surveillance, you failed years before elsewhere.

There’s already a place perfect for parents with this mindset. It’s just too bad that place doesn’t like random people trickling in, even before 2020.