Based on what evidence? A few regulations? Seems like a strange definition of 'everything'...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
UK Government Denies U-Turn on Plan to Scan Encrypted Messages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Such spying will only affect regular people who do not break any laws. Criminals could just send encrypted emails of use some open source P2P messenger that will still be encrypted. They will also use TOR and VPNs.
They have to admit that they lost that fight. Encrypting will always be exponentially easier than cracking that encryption. A criminal can use an encryption that is so strong, that all supercomputers in the world can't crack it. Some methods of encryption are even safe against quantum computers.
After 9/11 our governments started treating every citizen as a potential terrorist. Some countries even ask you "Have you ever been a member of a terrorist organisation" at their immigration form. Of course every terrorist would answer with "Yes".
They have to admit that they lost that fight. Encrypting will always be exponentially easier than cracking that encryption. A criminal can use an encryption that is so strong, that all supercomputers in the world can't crack it. Some methods of encryption are even safe against quantum computers.
After 9/11 our governments started treating every citizen as a potential terrorist. Some countries even ask you "Have you ever been a member of a terrorist organisation" at their immigration form. Of course every terrorist would answer with "Yes".
Uk left the world
Time for the world to leave the uk
Time for the world to leave the uk
Police did their jobs before this and they’ll do their jobs after. Absolutely nothing precludes them from using their physical access to devices following a bust on someone engaging in this type of activity to start in on the people with whom they were communicating.
Yes, that means that someone has to engage in it, perhaps for some time, to get caught, and it also means some will simply get away with it. That’s an unfortunate consequence of privacy, but the thing with habitual criminals is they tend to eventually make a mistake.
And thats why youre posting nonsense on forums and actually intelligent people disagree
It’s election year next year so don’t take anything they say too seriously.
And Social Security, FEMA (disaster funding), Medicare, et. al.
Right, because that has always worked in the past. No government official would do J Edgar did and compile dossiers on people and if threatened point out what would likely be the result of a dossier “somehow” become public.
Or simply collect info but label them and the collection an “Official Secret.”
While many of the actions may be well intentioned once you open the door you can’t effectively reclose it.
And that doesn’t even account for the decryption scheme get hacked or in the hands of governments who have no qualms about using it for whatever reasons they chose.
Or simply collect info but label them and the collection an “Official Secret.”
While many of the actions may be well intentioned once you open the door you can’t effectively reclose it.
And that doesn’t even account for the decryption scheme get hacked or in the hands of governments who have no qualms about using it for whatever reasons they chose.
I suspect that this legislation was done on behalf of the USA and the other ‘five eyes’ intelligence sharing countries (the Anglo-sphere basically) to see if the tech companies would blink. And they didn’t.
Govt saying “for the children” means someone is trying to get away with something.
and the government saying 'people want protect their privacy and security' means someone is trying to get away with something.
Errr… what on Earth does socialism have to do with that?! Do you know what socialism means?
I appreciate this nuanced position however I think some powers the govt should not have. The US govt often is granted powers or makes laws that have good intent. But soon enough we find they are using these powers in ways never intended and far beyond what reasonable people anticipated. My guess is that this is a universal govt failing and powers given by the govt will soon expand. Well drugs hurt children so we need to read the messages of drug dealers. And then the users. Well maybe the family members of users to catch the dealer. And it expands outward with good intent until one day we are arresting people for unrelated crimes we “discovered” looking for a different crime.
The safest option is that encryption remains trusted and no one gets a back door.
Not the point of this post but your Overton window is very narrow. The conservatives would be a middle of the road party in some countries.
You spelled authoritarianism wrong.
You mean fascism. They’re two different things. Socialism, done right, is actually a good thing.
Isn't that exactly socialism?
Did the UK government officials watch James Bond: Spectre and walked out of the cinema and figured that looked like such a great idea?
Technology doesn't care about motive or morals. When you create a system with backdoors to benefit the government, you will most certainly have bad actors exploiting the same backdoors. It's called "Zero-Trust" for a reason. It's the only way to achieve anything secure and private.
And how do you ensure these methods stay safe and secure? It will be all over the dark web in no time at all.
Another issue with this whole "scan for explicit child material" is how to judge the evidence once it appears. What stops hackers from sending out materials that will trigger this mechanism on purpose to trick the system into considering people they want to bring down as someone who receives such material?
All of this sounds like a real mess to me.
Technology doesn't care about motive or morals. When you create a system with backdoors to benefit the government, you will most certainly have bad actors exploiting the same backdoors. It's called "Zero-Trust" for a reason. It's the only way to achieve anything secure and private.
And how do you ensure these methods stay safe and secure? It will be all over the dark web in no time at all.
Another issue with this whole "scan for explicit child material" is how to judge the evidence once it appears. What stops hackers from sending out materials that will trigger this mechanism on purpose to trick the system into considering people they want to bring down as someone who receives such material?
All of this sounds like a real mess to me.
Nope. Socialism is what American corporations have where they don't pay taxes and get taxpayer money to bail them out.
Criminals are using new technology and changing the way they operate. I understand how law enforcement needs to evolve to combat the threat. The issue is that criminals don't need to follow laws for their activity, while law enforcement does.
If someone is known sex offender, it would be very helpful to society for the government to keep tabs on whom they are chatting with and what is being shared. Same for known terrorists affiliations, gang members and those convicted of fraud. These types of crimes need to be stopped before they happen.
The issue, as I see it, is that once you create a back door, there is no way to keep that back door closed from, say China, or Russia from using it for political purposes, rather than law enforcement. Further, there is no way to ensure that the NSA doesn't put a "national security" request on someone because they are a Trump supporter, or Obama supporter or an Ed Snowder supporter.
And this is where we get stuck. We cannot destroy our freedom in support of law enforcement, because everything is fallible.
