Slashdot Mirror
UK Government Proposes 'License To Hack' As Encryption Proves Hard To Defeat (thetimes.co.uk)
An anonymous reader writes: The Times reports (paywalled) that the Investigatory Powers Bill promised by the UK government over the summer is likely to be presented to parliament next month, and that it will contain 'dizzying' powers for MI5, MI6 and GCHQ to hack the devices of individuals under investigation, with the permission of the home secretary. An implementation of the Wilson Doctrine will mean that British MPs will not be subject to these powers in the same way as other citizens. According to a digital evidence expert that the Times interviewed, the bill addresses the difficulty that the UK government is sharing with other nations in defeating encryption effectively. "Hacking is different from interception because it allows hackers to take control of the device, using it for surveillance and accessing data from the source, rather than simply intercepting them, which is becoming increasingly difficult."
This is very important. If you do not assume that they are already doing this, and have been for years, then you are delusional.
See Edward Snowden for the most recent proof.
So if I understand this correctly, the corrupt powers-that-be will be immune to that which is needed the most to clean up their actions that, if they were a common citizen would be criminal?
hmmm...
So if governments around the world are giving themselves license to hack into our stuff, do anything they please, and share this with other governments ... then it almost seems like a moral duty that every government server is now fair game.
Just sayin'. If governments are declaring war on our rights, they have no expectation people won't do this to them.
Sorry, but governments who are claiming to be defending our rights while taking those rights away have lost an awful lot of moral authority here.
Especially when they take the stuff they said they'd only use to fight terrorism, and now apply it to every day things.
Fuck you, Big Brother. Fuck you.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
It's like the UK is reliving it's past, minus the part about the Magna Carta.
That would be license to kill -SIGHUP <pid>
Have gnu, will travel.
Like certain pictures that will land the person hacked in jail for a long time. No need to find anything actually bad anymore, you can just easily get rid of anybody you do not like. That is how it is done in any self-respecting police-state or fascist state!
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Theresa May has tried to pass Snoopers charter and withdrawn. Now she tries this shit, but Snowden two weeks ago revealed GCHQ can hack every phone. We get it. You can see her group, but this isn't a coup. Britain is still a Parliamentary democracy. We can see she's trying to legalize what you lot are already doing, and she's doing the same pedo terrorists shit that was used to attack Parliament recently.
Remember Tom Watsons "Parliament pedo killers ring"? This is an attempt to use an idiot (Tom Watson) to make claims of a massive pedo ring in Parliament, so that no MP dare challenge the latest push by Theresa May's group to get mass surveillance because of "PEDOS IN PARLIAMENT!"
But you didn't get Snoopers charter, so Karma Police mass surveillance is illegal, and you don't have legal cover to hack smartphones, so your Smurf hacks are illegal. Are you GCHQ lot part of the democracy run by Parliament or part of this slow motion coup?
Yes, because the UK executes thousands every year and sends thousands for "re-education", and has no independent judiciary and is a one-party state, just like China.
Here's a clue retard, virtually all states have some repressive characteristics. But some are still *much, much much* worse than others. See?
Actually you're probably one of the China-bots who does the 'ooo look a squirrel' thing every time China's truly abysmal human rights record is mentioned. Nobody's fooled you know.
(And for what it's worth the UK password disclosure stuff has barely been used and is full of holes and would fall apart if anyone took it to the European court of human rights, but yes, it is still repressive).
If the government takes over a device and starts masquerading as the owner, how do we know? Could they hack your phone, use it to view a forbidden website, and then land you in jail because of it? Conversely, does this give people plausible deniability for actions performed on their digital equipment?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.