Slashdot Mirror
London Terrorist Used WhatsApp, UK Calls For Backdoors (yahoo.com)
Wednesday 52-year-old Khalid Masood "drove a rented SUV into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge before smashing it into Parliament's gates and rushing onto the grounds, where he fatally stabbed a policeman and was shot by other officers," writes the Associated Press. An anonymous reader quotes their new report:
Westminster Bridge attacker Khalid Masood sent a WhatsApp message that cannot be accessed because it was encrypted by the popular messaging service, a top British security official said Sunday. British press reports suggest Masood used the messaging service owned by Facebook just minutes before the Wednesday rampage that left three pedestrians and one police officer dead and dozens more wounded.... Home Secretary Amber Rudd used appearances on BBC and Sky News to urge WhatsApp and other encrypted services to make their platforms accessible to intelligence services and police trying to carrying out lawful eavesdropping. "We need to make sure that organizations like WhatsApp -- and there are plenty of others like that -- don't provide a secret place for terrorists to communicate with each other," she said...
Rudd also urged technology companies to do a better job at preventing the publication of material that promotes extremism. She plans to meet with firms Thursday about setting up an industry board that would take steps to make the web less useful to extremists.
Rudd also urged technology companies to do a better job at preventing the publication of material that promotes extremism. She plans to meet with firms Thursday about setting up an industry board that would take steps to make the web less useful to extremists.
This is the same lady who thinks that they need to hire the people who "know the right hashcodes to fight terrorists."
She has no place conjecturing on the usefulness of the free web to a potted plant, let alone to extremists (whose membership increasingly include Western government officials)
Why the focus on the communication technology? Its role in these sorts of incidents seems minor compared to the effect and involvement of vehicular technology. It wasn't chat software causing the physical harm; it was vehicles.
She's simply the latest of a long line of British ministers who don't really understand the first thing about the Internet and its associated technologies.
Hilariously, in the same interview she claimed that Google was at fault because it was far to easy to find ‘stabbing instructions’ online.
Right now its looking pretty bad for the intellectual elite over there.
- He was screened by police several times
- Made an extremist while in her magisty's pleasure
And now the police are saying "If we read *that message* of him saying 'god be with me', *then* they would know what he was upto and what he was doing".
Looks more like they're trying to find a scape goat.
Because it's SO difficult for someone to write a new app with no backdoors. Britain can't stop this; they can pass all the laws they want. But terrorists really don't care what the law says by definition. Plus it is a proven fact that British police can't stay within the lines when it comes to information like this.
Ms Rudd already covered that:
Her point, rightly or wrongly, is that even with "legal means" and proper warrants and the like there is still no way to access WhatsApp messages, whereas phone and snail mail records were accessible in the past.
Sure, a religion which promote to stone raped women and gays to death.
Move to that Utopian paradise where the citizens' never have to fret about terrorist attacks.
North Korea.
No raped women or gay men have been stoned to death in this country in the 100 odd years since the first mosque was built. If Muslims are planning to impose Sharia Law on us Brits, they're taking a very long time about it.
I believe Khalid was a British citizen. That's why he's allowed "in the UK". The bigger question is why aren't the British (and the Americans for that matter) insisting that new citizens (including their children) become CITIZENS of that country in heart and soul, not just a piece of paper with allegiance back to terrorist orgs/states, islamic or otherwise. But if we attempt to even say that, the snowflakes start yelling RAYCYST!!@#!
When I use WhatsApp through my phone, it shows the history of my conversations. Presumably the police have recovered Masoods phone, can use one of the numerous ways to get into it, and can thus see what messages he sent over WhatsApp and to whom.
In short, why the hell can't Plod read Masoods last words over WhatsApp? Also if they knew he used WhatsApp, that shows they have either broken into his phone already or picked up some data from his ISP already.
Further, the latest UK Investigatory Powers Act regarding security only wanted metadata, not content, and a great deal of effort was spent convincing the general public that this was all that is needed.
So my question is, is my view of the situation wrong or is Amber Rudd technologically clueless?
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
So apparently the problem is too much free speech and too much privacy.
To get our intellectual freedom back, we're going to need a movement as powerful as the civil rights movement. Saying this stupid shit should be as taboo as saying a racial slur! This "Amber Rudd" needs to be made an example of. Really rake her over the coals. "You're advocating what?" "Why do you hate freedom?" Never let her live it down, same as if she'd said something stupid about a minority group. This shit needs to become the new hate speech.
It's not okay that she thinks like that and is as important as she is. We need to give her shit.
.... urge governments to do a better job at preventing the immigration of populations that promotes extremism.
So what does immigration have to do with this particular British born animal?
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Quran (7:80-84) - "...For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" -
Postal chess was forbidden in the US during WWII, putatively becaue it might be a secret code...
davecb@spamcop.net
What laws would they change if it was revealed 'the terrists' were communicating via snail mail.
Would they require logs of your snail mail metadata, ban envelopes ?
Well in the US the USPS actually does log all mail meta-data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_Isolation_Control_and_Tracking
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
I believe Khalid was a British citizen. That's why he's allowed "in the UK". The bigger question is why aren't the British (and the Americans for that matter) insisting that new citizens (including their children) become CITIZENS of that country in heart and soul, not just a piece of paper with allegiance back to terrorist orgs/states, islamic or otherwise. But if we attempt to even say that, the snowflakes start yelling RAYCYST!!@#!
How would you do that? Is there some scanner that can look into one's heart and soul?
He had been investigated years ago, but cleared by the security services.
So:
1. Either they want to monitor everybody's communications, or
2. They are lying about the effect of having access to WhatsApp messages, or
3. This is just another excuse to monitor everyone's communications.
I believe that western civilization is in the process (if it hasn't already happened) of being taken over by the security apparatus, under the pretext of "protecting" us (in the same was as "devout muslims" "protect" their women by making them wear veils.
It's all about control under the guise of "protection". As I type that, I realize that it sounds just like the mafia.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
"23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrahâ"from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the citiesâ"and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lotâ(TM)s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt." - Genesis 19:23-26
"He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it, and He revealed the Torch and the Gospels aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Furqan." - Quran 3:3
Same story. The Quran was sent to confirm what was sent before.
Say I'm living in a repressive society. I NEED to destroy or kill government officials to live free.
If I am unable to communicate, then I am left nude with no recourse alone and helpless.
If I can communicate, I can form a revolution, I can change society for the better and improve all of our lives.
We cannot destroy our freedom of expression
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
The terrorist killed 3 people. There are billions of us, and our voices should not be silenced because of madmen and the power hungry elite, both sides of the same extremist coin. The politician calling for the silencing of everyone is no different than the madman trying to silence those against his ideals, she just does it in a smoother way. It is no less destructive and limiting.
We must bear with reality, bear with our pain, bear with our human reactions. We must not pervert what it is to be ourselves to make others feel safe, or else there will be nothing left which we can point to and say "THIS IS US, imperfectly beautiful".
----
Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake."
Think this through - the terrorist sent a message "as he was driving". Being able to access the message after the fact does NOT stop the terrorism. The next step, and the ONLY way this will work is constant - real time - monitoring of all communication systems for all platforms everywhere. When a potential "hit" it comes across, the GPS in the device is located and tracked. Again, it may not have been soon enough, but demanding a back by law enforcement demonstrates the desire for a complete dystopian world.
Of course then terrorists just switch to encrypted radios. Which will imply it will be illegal for non-military to own such devices.
Is this the world we want?
The heretics were much worse. Fortunately we were able to kick the most extreme elements of those out of the country to the western colonies, who are now called the USA.
It is now common knowledge that all western governments have so many way to monitor people that it is offensive for them to suggest they need more powers to have more surveillance. That western powers spread their nets so far across our "democracy" and not in a focused manner means they are obviously ineffective in filling their mandate of protecting the people from terrorist threats. And because they are so ineffectual against terrorism they use that as justification to spread their net even wider.
So let us all not pretend that the state has any concern for stopping terrorism because terrorism has no impact on the state, it only impact the populous. If terrorism occurs then that just adds another reason for clamping down on the populous even more. We are being treated with the contempt we deserve for not steadfastly protecting democracy.
For decades Islamic human rights violations went ignored by western powers so any pandering to stopping extremism should be viewed as the bullshit it is. Islamic extremism is a good reason for the state to become even more overt in its quest to police the state because power begets power. And that's good for business because they are who pay for the politicians to operate the inverted totalitarian state we live in.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" ... privately.
09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
In his case he was born in the UK 52 years ago. He had a very British sounding name - Adrian Russell Elms. That suggests his family has been in the UK for even longer. He probably would have originally seemed British in 'Heart and Soul'. Seems he had a history of crime though, and had spent time in prison. From the sounds of it his conversion change of name and radicalisation happened during the time he spent in prison. So he was brainwashed and recruited, rather than being born that way.
The lesson learnt from the IRA was quite clear. Violence begats only more violence. It is only the call to cooperate to end that violence that is the solution. There is a type of person, aggressive and slow witted, that will commit atrocities in the name of. The name doesn't matter, it could be a religion, or a warped philosophy, or a country. When you speak out in aggression, your blind hatred plain to see, it is obvious that you are part of the problem, not the solution.
One does not have to be an Islamophobe to be repulsed by killing, whether done in the name of honour or otherwise.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
If you're actually serious about that question... I'll bite.
I'm a Muslim immigrant to Canada. I'm pretty secular now, but the idea that somehow you immigrate and then in the next generation, you're magically Canadian with Western values is just ignorant.
The culture matters. The numbers matter. The government policies matter.
Get enough people of a certain culture in an area and that culture and way of life becomes dominant. I guess if you thin being British/Canadian is just a piece of paper, then maybe this doesn't matter to you.
I have a lot of family in the UK. It really is a different world. Heck, I don't even go. I have family there 2nd/3rd generation where there is total gender segregation, always talk of Sharia...When new immigrants come, they settle around there to keep the community Islamic.This part is key... as you keep bringing in more people who settle there, it really keep the community a certain way. Once you hit a certain threshold, you're basically created a community that stands on its own with its own ideology.
This is not unique to Islam, by any stretch of the imagination.
You can talk to many Muslim immigrant families. Most will tell you the same thing. Well at least in my life, they have. When the community is small, integration is easy. My in-laws for example, came to Canada in the 70s. Hardly modern by any respect. My father-in-law thought nothing of buy someone a bottle of wine as a gift. He wouldn't drink himself. They're not that secular. My wife often complains that her family completely changed as more and more family was brought in. Few used to wear the hijab. Then everyone started and the social moral police started. Dating started to become more of a scandal if people found out a daughter was dating. Aunts who used to date and got married suddenly turned all religious and forbade their daughters from dating. Islamic school suddenly became a thing... People started wearing the niqab and marrying religious people from Asia. Yeah... now I have 2 silly segregated weddings this summer. lol.
This is the cultural problem. It is then layered with political issues. I don't really hang in dangerous circles, but I've seen what it can do. I know a few girls in the extended family who have actually talked positively of going to the Islamic State as that is real Islam. Yeah... girls born in Canada, but such are their values.
I don't blame this all on immigration. You can have high rates of immigration with the necessary social support. I can say that even in Canada, this social support is just not there. My high school was heavily
Indian immigrants. There was virtually no social support. Parents beating kids. Girls disowned for dating. Forced marriages... all happened.
It's just ridiculously ignorant to think none of this matter and because someone is born in Canada/Britain, nothing else matters.
Anyways, enough of a rant. You get the point. Immigration matters, community matters, culture matters, government policies matters...
::cough:: I'll just leave this here... ::cough::
1,400 raped children in the UK by Muslim pedo ring while the UK police looked the other way to "not seem racist." (That's not even exaggerating.)
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I guess ignorance really is bliss.
Willie Dixon wrote it and Howlin' Wolf recorded it before either the Doors or Led Zeppelin were bands.
Of course the problem there was not lack of always-on monitoring of everyone in the off chance the police nothing something.
The problem was not encryption of private information.
The problem was leftist control of a council where them hamstrung themselves so tightly that they were ignoring child rape
cases in case they offended a minority group, some of whom were actively raping children..
And yet not one single one of those in positions of power who let this continue to happen are in prison, nor ever likely will be.
Because, you know, they are 'sorry', for allowing children to keep being violently raped.
But no, what we need is more cameras, less privacy, more government control - who cares what they DO with it.
Thank you for that very sincere and interesting post. Now there is just one thing I'd like to ask you that I didn't quite get: You mention "social support", what kind of social support do you mean? What kind of social support do you think would enable high immigration and still enable integration? Many Western societies have tried throwing money at the problem, and unfortunately that hasn't worked very well.
You can go into some "white" American suburb with a bunch of Muslim hate preachers and if - if! - you don't get tossed in prison immediately for running your dog-and-pony show, you'll get a conversion rate of less than .1% from normal citizen to terrorist idiot.
If we have learned anything from marketing: You have to match your message to the target group. Of course taking a muslim hate preacher to a white suburb won't work. It's hard to convince them that they are the scum of the earth.
If you want to convert people there into terrorists, you need to tell them ACA is bad for them, that lazy immigrants are stealing their jobs, any president could create jobs or any other staple of the white supremacists idiots and they will be willing to bomb blacks/jews/muslims or at least vote Trump.
Those "white" suburbs have the same vulnerabilities. You just have to trigger them slightly different.
bickerdyke
I have a similar anecdote which is not related to religion per se, but it covers cultural shifts too. My East-European country prior to end of WWII was mainly agrarian traditional society. After the war, communists came in power and started forced industrialization, stimulating massive migrations of previously rural inhabitants into cities, which grew, where former farmers became blue-collar working class, or students, then new intelligentsia. It was followed with cultural change, acquiring new habits and ways of life, cultural change and adopting new (Western) taste in clothing, music, and social behaviour. However, nearing the end of the 20th century, apparent became an underground trend which gradually became dominant: those new urbanites obviously suffered from some kind of countryside nostalgia and sort of guilt, and they bought into cheap country-flavoured kitsch and whatever was peddled to them as "traditional", including ethnic differentiation and chauvinism against "historical enemy" ethnic groups. It became fashionable to be "old way", to profess religiousness in blatant ways, to idealize not-at-all-rosy past, to reject democratic values for traditional authoritarianism and wish for "restoration" of prior "greatness" which never actually was.
I'd say that the mechanism behind what you are describing is basically the same: As humans approach the end of their physical existence, most of them start feeling the guilt for straying away from their traditional upbringing. There is ebb and flow in cultural influence. Perhaps they are more willing to change while they are young and need the world, wish to find partners for procreation, various friends to learn from, or co-work with on attaining success in life, but once their thirst for wide social connections wane, their internal wish to satisfy their parents and ancestors pushes them to change their mind back, and then they imprint that on their offspring. Your parents probably got you when they were young and the world was a better place and the things were probably going for the better in your ancestral land, too, with visible benefits from opening up to the world. Alternatively, your parents actually did succeed better then the most, reaped the rewards of cultural change, and I suppose you did well yourself, too.
Hey. I dont know if a sure fire way. But i leave the door open for good government policy to provide social support.
I could see things like social workers working closely with families. Not to take kids away from parents, but to help people parent. Maybe schools can provide services for things like kids threatened with being disowned or beat...
Also i think the general social environment should allow for discussion. Probably the one that annoys me most is that white people actively attack their right wing. Its not socially acceptable today to attack islams right wing. And i dont mean terrorism here. Just social things. I dont care about the hijab but i mean is it a thing to be celebrated? No where else do western people support slut shaming and female modesty dreas codes. Just treat immigrants with the same standards u expect of anyone else.
SUVs should be banned
If we arrest everyone driving SUVs, there'll be about 85% fewer twats on the road (gotta arrest BMW drivers too to get to 95%).
Sorry what was the problem?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Seriously, she's Britain's answer to Sarah Palin. Or rather, an answer to a question nobody asked.
And while Palin is at least a looker, Rudd also has this "used car" air about her. This woman has so far in her total career never said a single sentence that wasn't a tear-soaked platitude, an "outraged demand" that simply echoed what everyone else has already been saying or simply and plainly stupid. I really have no idea what service she could provide other than being the bad example on how NOT to do something.
Seriously. When asked at her funeral to say anything good about her, all you can sensibly say is "she died".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How many rapes by catholic priests and society looked the other way? Not that I am saying that this is any kind of excuse...
When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion