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.

39 of 329 comments (clear)

  1. Dear Prime Minister Cameron, by haruchai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Dear Prime Minister Cameron, by hughbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agree. Actually he can fuck off anyway, an awful prime-minister surrounded by greedy, idiotic cronies...

      --
      On y va, qui mal y pense!
    2. Re:Dear Prime Minister Cameron, by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Awful? Dunno, seems like a run of the mill PM to be honest. Saying he's an awful PM implies we regularly get better PMs.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Dear Prime Minister Cameron, by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cameron's real problem is that he doesn't understand anything that doesn't have profit as a bottom line. And the greedy cronies that he's surrounded by (it would be a mistake to think them idiots) aren't interested in anything that doesn't have profit as a bottom line. It is, they believe, everything that makes reality work.

      There is no obvious profit margin in other people's privacy. Therefore it has no value, and is a hindrance to where profit is to be made. So it must be removed.

  2. 1984 is not an instruction manual, David by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If we could hook Orwell's corpse up to a turbine, we'd have the energy problem solved.

  3. Yep, the government _is_ the terrorist ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 !
    1. Re:Yep, the government _is_ the terrorist ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The word is tyranny, or despotism, not terrorism. However, I'm not sure that even the former words apply (I'm an American).

      In the UK and in the US, the basic principle is "government by consent of the governed". This philosophy probably originated by the Athenians in ancient Greece and was further developed by a series of philosophers in England, France, and Germany between 200 and 450 years ago. Unlike the democracy in ancient Greece, its usage in the West does *not* mean that the governed are to be consulted for approval of every individual act done by the government, e.g. reading your email. It *does* mean that the electorate can vote out the politicians at the head of the government, and in the legislatures, if they aren't pleased with their policies in general.

    2. Re:Yep, the government _is_ the terrorist ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd say it's starting to drift into terrorism territory fairly quick. A tyranny (or other forms of despotic rules) gives absolute power to the ruler, who use force to control his subjects. What is going on right now is more similar to terrorism, using fear to control the masses. It's not a threat of direct violence like a tyranny, but rather a threat of indirect violence.

      In fact, this is sounding more and more like dialogue from classic mobster flicks, where the men in suits warn you that not paying for protection might result in your shop burning to the ground or your kneecaps being broken.

  4. Capable, sure by phorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Capable, sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Almost all terror attacks are perpetrated by non-Muslims according to FBI and Europol reports. Less than 10% involve Muslim terrorists.

      https://www.europol.europa.eu/latest_publications/2
      http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05

      One of the largest terror attacks in Europe in the last 10 years were done by a Christian Norwegian, yet we don't blame Christians for it.

    2. Re:Capable, sure by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's clear that while not all muslims are terrorists, almost all terrorists seems to be muslims, how about a targeted approach. Normal people know that the problem at the moment is islam, why can't politicians see it.

      By the same logic, not all humans are terrorists, but all terrorists seem to be human. How about targeting all humans for surveillance?

      Oh wait, that's exactly what they wanna do...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Capable, sure by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The UK went through 40 years of serious terrorism perpetuated by protestant and catholic Christians, and yet throughout that entire period we never blamed the religion as a whole.

    4. Re:Capable, sure by jeremyp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is because the terrorism was not religiously motivated. Religion had a polarizing effect on the population of Northern Ireland, but the motivation for the terrorism was political, not religions: it was the Irish Republican Army, not the Irish Catholic Army.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    5. Re:Capable, sure by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You assume I'm talking about the IRA, I was not - I'm talking about the car bombings, attacks, beatings, fire bombings etc etc etc that went on between the Northern Irish protestant and catholic populations during that same period.

      Look it up, its a *very* interesting period for many reasons. The IRA is certainly the fore runner in most peoples minds, but it wasnt the only thing going on in the area at the time.

    6. Re:Capable, sure by Bongo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, the interpretation step performed by the first two is considered a corruption.

      The third is purest and best and absolute, whilst the first two are seen as corrupted.

      That's why they can use the same god but still trump all the rest.

      So the ideal is, never allow Islam to be corrupted, never, by anything or anyone. Never allow reinterpretation or criticism.

  5. Idiots at work by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!
  6. Starting with him? by s.petry · · Score: 3, Informative

    Funny how these guys and gals make such strong claims, but never want to be the victims of their own policies. Don't worry, we have the same exact rules in the US where politicians are immune to laws, and rich people of course. The only people subject to laws are the "common" people, or in the words of Henry Kissinger and his ilk "the useless eaters". Yeah yeah, some of their "business" communications may be classified but their emails to gramma should be fully available for public consumption.

    Petitions should go up immediately: Politicians are the "trial" batch for seeing how this works and the public requires full access to their personal communications. Beta group, or what ever you want to call them. A 2 year moratorium should be placed on any other changes pending the usefulness and feedback from that group. Further, anyone with a net worth of more than 50 million should be in the same pilot group, or perhaps make them group C phased in 1 year after the politicians are snooped upon.

    Lets also not forget that the recent terrorists in France _were_ snooped upon and used zero encryption on their mail. They were just missed in all the noise, probably because of the massive haystacks of data people "claim" they need to find something. Bigger haystacks don't make needles easier to find, quite the opposite. Many of our security experts on both sides of the pond have said that same thing.. repeatedly.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  7. David Cameron! Read THIS communication! by Chas · · Score: 3

    FUCK YOU! You big-brother assmunch!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  8. Re: Obviously on the right track by chentiangemalc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We should start by banning use of https

  9. Government or Authorities? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's hope he means "the authorities" and not "the government" since the government consists of MPs and if they have to be able to read it they will probably need to outlaw words with more than 3 syllables and writing something in a language other than English will count as use of advanced encryption.

  10. Bottles and horses by CauseBy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  11. funnily enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  12. Gotta stop all those law abiding terrorists... by GoddersUK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Gotta stop all those law abiding terrorists... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We all know that's not the goal, so stop going for the cheap mod points.

      If you stop people being able to do something legally, then the vast majority of law abiding people stop doing it. Hand guns were de-legalised back in the 1990s, and hand gun ownership dropped dramatically - so now its easy to make a judgement call as to whether than gun you found on that teenager with a hoodie is actually legitimate or not, without having to go through a license check etc. So it makes it easier, and less time consuming, for the police to remove guns from those who shouldn't be in ownership of them.

      We have seen it a lot with various things over the years - mobile phone use in cars, smoking in enclosed public places, various "legal" highs etc etc.

      The same thinking goes for encryption - allow only government approved encryption for the law abiding and when you come across a message which uses non-approved encryption then it has a higher likelihood of being related to something the police would be interested in rather than just Auntie Gene's shopping list shes sending her son.

      Note - I don't agree with the sentiment, but the thinking is sound.

    2. Re:Gotta stop all those law abiding terrorists... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, The thinking is consistent , not sound.

      It's a good thing when law enforcement officers have to take time to do their jobs. The power of the state is a terrible and awesome thing. The last thing a free society needs is law enforcement with spare time.

      An idle cop is a cop who will find something to do. If his job is to arrest people and present cases for prosecution, he'll find new and creative ways to make that happen.

      In the UK, they're doing random searches for knives...That's unthinkable in most of my country.

      Mandating the use of compromised cryptography doesn't benefit the citizenry. It makes it possible, and arguably inevitable, that the government will use the knowledge of people's private communications to quash legitimate dissent.

      For example, it's alleged that the FBI had knowledge of MLK cheating on his wife. How do you think the department of justice would have used that information if they had captured emails or naughty text messages proving it?

      I'll take risky freedom over the safety of an overpowering government, any day.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  13. My encryption key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My encryption key is the full text of a copyrighted book that was never licensed to me nor anyone in my country.

    If I told you it or wrote it down, it would be public performance or copyright infringement.

    Yours,
    Trollface Q.C.

  14. With an Idiot in charge by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is why it will fail. Not because it would destroy everyone's privacy but because it will destroy the privacy of large, international companies. They will threaten to move out of the UK, the tories will panic and the bill will disappear until the idiot in charge forgets again and attempts to resurrect it for a third time in a couple of years from now (assuming he survives the general election).

  15. Re:Obviously on the right track by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  16. Re:Obviously on the right track by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  17. Re:Hope the muslims win then. by Ziest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  18. Again, this has nothing to do with terrorism by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  19. How to spot an authoritarian by dbIII · · Score: 5, Informative

    A "conservative" by dictionary definition does not advocate radical changes, such as removal of the right to communicate privately with banks, business associates, relatives, lovers etc.
    Keep that in mind next time one of these authoritarians tell you how conservative they are.

  20. Re:Don't Understand by Barsteward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    " 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)
  21. I agree by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

    UK Prime Minister Says Gov't Should Be Capable of Reading Any Communications

    Yes, literacy level in the government is appalling, something really should be done about it,

  22. I don't get it... by jonwil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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)

  23. UK = Hypocrites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Charlie_Hebdo_shooting

    Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons, "[...] we stand squarely for free speech and democracy. [...]"

    This is the same country that:

    * Arrests people for saying "offensive" things on Facebook/Twitter
    * Prosecutes people for having "offensive" Japanese manga featuring lolicon, yet defends cartoon images of the Prophet Muhammed which some members of the Islamic community finds "offensive."
    * Sends GCHQ thugs around to a newspaper to smash their hard drives and other perphierals into a gazillion pieces
    * Has secret trials
    * Forces people to disclose their passwords for encryption volumes or other things such as websites and jails those who fail to do so

    Need I go on?

  24. Free speech is impossible under mass surveillance by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact that these scum choose to use the Charlie Hebdo attack to justify it particularly stinks. I'm sure the Charlie Hebdo victims weren't doing the cartoons in order to get the government to outlaw free speech, but that's the impact such action would have.

    Encryption insures you can speak freely without the chilling effect of knowing your government may be listening. To ban it is clearly to eliminate freedom of speech.

  25. God and the Devil by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  26. Re:Hope the muslims win then. by rwa2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.