Slashdot Mirror
'Real People' Don't Need End-To-End Encryption In Their Messaging Apps, UK Home Secretary Says (bbc.com)
UK home secretary Amber Rudd has called on messaging apps like WhatsApp to ditch end-to-end encryption, arguing that it aids terrorists. From a report: The major technology companies must step up their fight against extremism or face new laws, the home secretary has told the BBC. Amber Rudd said technology companies were not doing enough to beat "the enemy" on the internet. Encryption tools used by messaging apps had become a "problem," she added. Ms Rudd is meeting with representatives from Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and others at a counter-terrorism forum in San Francisco. Tuesday's summit is the first gathering of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism, an organisation set up by the major companies in the wake of recent terror attacks. In a joint statement, the companies taking part said they were co-operating to "substantially disrupt terrorists' ability to use the internet in furthering their causes, while also respecting human rights." In an op-ed, she wrote Tuesday: Real people often prefer ease of use and a multitude of features to perfect, unbreakable security ... Who uses WhatsApp because it is end-to-end encrypted, rather than because it is an incredibly user-friendly and cheap way of staying in touch with friends and family? Companies are constantly making trade-offs between security and 'usability,' and it is here where our experts believe opportunities may lie.
Yes, indeed. What real people need end to end encryption for financial transactions? It's totally okay to allow unknown parties to breach encryption because, you know, REAL PEOPLE!!!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
And I need end to end encryption, for things like my banking info, purchases on the net, and my sexting with age adequate MILFs (I am 43).
And more so, I also WANT end to end encryption on all my comms.
'Nuff said
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
Tell that to former opposition politicians in Turkey and Venezuela ...
Do you really think something similar couldn't happen in the UK? In twenty years? In forty years?
You may not be around then, but the laws that are made now will.
"We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
You're talking about a country where a slim majority voted to cut off the metaphorical branch they were standing on because some con-artists sold them the illusion that they somehow get control (oh, and apparently vast amounts of money for the NHS).
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Firstly, she's a she. Secondly, it's not her chosen profession - she was allotted that cabinet role, and could easily be doing education or transport in the next reshuffle. Thirdly, if she thinks banning encryption does anything to stop criminals who, by definition, do things illegally, I'd suggest she's awful at her job.
but there's no reason to assume that he's not acting in good faith
Of course there is: the loaded language she uses precludes good faith. The choice of words is designed to make it sound as if there is something wrong with you if you want encryption, and if you want it then you're not the sort of person the government wants to protect.
That's pretty much textbook bad faith.
SJW n. One who posts facts.