Slashdot Mirror


Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance Argues 'Privacy is Not Absolute' in Push For Encryption Backdoors (itnews.com.au)

The Five Eyes, the intelligence alliance between the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, issued a statement warning they believe "privacy is not absolute" and tech companies must give law enforcement access to encrypted data or face "technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions." Slashdot reader Bismillah shares a report: The governments of Australia, United States, United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand have made the strongest statement yet that they intend to force technology providers to provide lawful access to users' encrypted communications. At the Five Country Ministerial meeting on the Gold Coast last week, security and immigration ministers put forward a range of proposals to combat terrorism and crime, with a particular emphasis on the internet. As part of that, the countries that share intelligence with each other under the Five-Eyes umbrella agreement, intend to "encourage information and communications technology service providers to voluntarily establish lawful access solutions to their products and services." Such solutions will apply to products and services operated in the Five-Eyes countries which could legislate to compel their implementation. "Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions," the Five-Eyes joint statement on encryption said.

2 of 421 comments (clear)

  1. The IRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Without the internet, without computer based encryption the IRA was able to coordinate terrorist activities for decades.

    There are still "Numbers stations" which publicly just broadcast a series of numbers

    There are thousands of ways to transmit information, all undetectable.

    For example if a child wears a red t-shirt it could mean the house is under surveillance, the child knows nothing, its just what he was given to wear that day.

    A loaf of bead gets bought before mid day, or after , there is a different meaning

    If someone posts on a message board saying their cat has run away, it could have another meaning to others

    Those that want to hide in plain sight and transmit encrypted information will still be able to do so with impunity, this just puts honest people at risk.

    As for the "nothing to hide" argument , of course people have something to hide.
    A GP who likes to dress as a baby in nappies, a male lawyer who likes to dress as cinderella, a wife who is having an affair with the gardener, a Jew who likes bacon, someone being an atheist , being gay, ex member of a hate group, illegitimate child, paying off a porn star and playboy model. There are millions of things we keep to ourselves and the government wants to be trusted with that information.... "I don't think so Tim".

  2. Re: Thank Snowden by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do you have _any_ reason to think that Mr. Snowden's behavior was _anything_ other than an honest man trying to report criminal behavior by his employers? He reported it internally, he tried to escalate it through his own NSA superiors, and he was ignored repeatedly. Mr. Putin is a former KGB head, of course he's taking advantage of it. But Mr. Snowden has behaved cautiously, and as ethically as possible, at every stage.