Slashdot Mirror
UK Prime Minister Says Gov't Should Be Capable of Reading Any Communications
Dr_Barnowl writes: The BBC reports that UK Prime Minister David Cameron has vowed to introduce a "comprehensive piece of legislation" aimed at there being no "means of communication ... we cannot read," in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris. While he didn't mention encryption specifically, the only logical means by which this could occur would be by the introduction of compulsory key escrow, and the banning of forms of encryption which do not use it. While the UK already essentially has a legal means to demand your encryption keys (and imprison you indefinitely if you don't comply), this would fall short if you have a credible reason for not having the key any more (such as using an OTR plugin for your chosen chat program).
The U.S. tried a similar tack with Clipper in the 90s. As we all know, terrorists with any technical chops are unlikely to be affected, given the vast amount of freely available, military-grade crypto now available, and the use of boring old cold war tradecraft. Ironically, France used to ban the use of strong cryptography but has largely liberalized its regime since 2011.
The U.S. tried a similar tack with Clipper in the 90s. As we all know, terrorists with any technical chops are unlikely to be affected, given the vast amount of freely available, military-grade crypto now available, and the use of boring old cold war tradecraft. Ironically, France used to ban the use of strong cryptography but has largely liberalized its regime since 2011.
Let's see you decrypt the following:
Do kindly fuck off at your earliest convenience. Not a terrorist but like Charlie Hedbo, refuse to live on my knees.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
If we could hook Orwell's corpse up to a turbine, we'd have the energy problem solved.
" As we all know, terrorists with any technical chops are unlikely to be affected, given the vast amount of freely available, military-grade crypto now available, and the use of boring old cold war tradecraft."
VPro/VT/Intel Management Engine bypasses all this. Spy on the bus, not to mention a built in VNC server that pulls from the hardware gfx buffer.
Bloody revolution is needed.
In the UK men are put in prison for "offensive" tweets.
They can be jailed for life if they don't stop "offensive" "antisocial" speech.
The UK needs to be BURNED to the ground, along with all other likemined feminist leftist European states and the people that run them (they need to be burned alive).
They do not have the right to rule over us. There needs to be an US style revolution there.
I ran away from China some decades ago because the Communist government of China was more or less acting like a terroristic entity
I ran away from China and ended up in the West, and I thought I am safe ... apparently, I was wrong!
Now the Western nations are trying to become more China than China !
Oooooh, my !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Sure, you should be capable of reading anything, provided you've got the encryption key, provided you've got a warrant to request it, provided that the warrant is based on certifiable facts and a meaningful threat/need.
Otherwise, fuck off.
I imagine that the Prime Minister thinks that he can force Google and other emails providers to hand over emails to GCHQ and, crucially, the Prime Minister cannot comprehend the idea that people can set up their own email server.
The same argument goes for other protocols.
Probably, no one, other than politicians and Dail Mail readers, takes this seriously. It will be forgotten about after the next election.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
We should start by banning use of https
In other news, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has vowed to put the genie back in the bottle. On the way to do that, he's going to shut the barn door and go looking for his horse.
it's not the terrorists attacking a magazine's office that affects your free speech...
it's the government's RESPONSE to said attack on a free speech medium, that will have a much larger impact in limiting your free speech.
The irony is rich, yet the statist types will NEVER understand this.
The terrorists have no problem with breaking the law to kill and murder people on kamikaze missions... but I'm sure they're nice reasonable people who will stop using encryption if we make it illegal.
If you ban encryption, then only criminals will have encryption.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
And the criminals will have the same access as the governments wreaking havoc among bank transactions and identity thefts as well as trade in company secrets.
It will really be opening Pandora's Box to restrict encryption.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I don't wish any member of the US government to be put to death, what I do wish is for these bastards to be stripped of all their wealth and privileges and forced to live in a roach infested studio apartment in the bad section of town. Then I would force them to work as an assistant night fry cook at Walley's Wonderful World of Burgers in Festering Boil, Oklahoma. These people have forgotten, if they ever knew, what the rest of us put up with in order to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. We need to have these people learn what real work looks like.
Another day closer to redwood heaven
All 3 Charlie Hebdo terrorists were known extremists and were under surveillance. The French authorities simply dropped the ball and fucked up - for lack of resources or for negligence.
They could convincingly make a case for vastly increased means of putting known terrorists under 24/7 surveillance, but the Charlie Hebdo attacks are a really poor argument for enhanced decryption powers, because the FUCKING TERRORISTS HAD BEEN CLEARLY IDENTIFIED ALREADY!
Clearly this is yet another exploitation of people's fear-du-jour to bring the world closer to a panopticon society. Me, I'm more scared of the government than muslim terrorists. 1984 anyone?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
" Is Cameron just making noise to win the hearts of those who agree with him?" - yes, there is an election in May this year.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Some random guys in ski masks shoot up a newspaper office because the newspaper prints something they don't like and all of a sudden most of Europe wants to bring in censorship and restrictions on the freedoms that a democracy is supposed to bring? Isn't that exactly what the terrorists want? Shouldn't we (and by we I mean the democracies of the world and their citizens) be protecting our freedoms in the face of bad people like this?
I dont support terrorists but I also dont support most of the actions that have been taken by governments in the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany and elsewhere in the name of the so-called "war on terror" (there are some measures like strengthening and securing cockpit doors that do make sense though)
in a project [US], estate [UK] or Scotland
FTFY ;)
Just as Satan is God's Most Valuable Employee (doing exactly what he needs done), Terrorists are the same for Dictators (and those that dream of being a Dictator): a perfect - some might say purpose-built* - excuse to destroy what they fear the most: the freedom of true privacy.
* - As some one pointed out on Twitter: ask yourself why Al-Queda has never even once tried to attack Israel.
I don't wish any member of the US government to be put to death, what I do wish is for these bastards to be stripped of all their wealth and privileges and forced to live in a roach infested studio apartment in the bad section of town. Then I would force them to work as an assistant night fry cook at Walley's Wonderful World of Burgers in Festering Boil, Oklahoma. These people have forgotten, if they ever knew, what the rest of us put up with in order to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. We need to have these people learn what real work looks like.
So, uh, Mike Rowe for President, then? Sounds good, the few political statements he's made have been bipartisan and very well thought out.