Caporegime
No they don't - not even if the authorities obtain a warrant.
David Cameron is going to try and ban encryption in Britain
- Thread starter LateX'Dog
- Start date
No they don't - not even if the authorities obtain a warrant.
The latest one is ICANN also wants to remove privacy options from when you sign up for a domain name, meaning that all your personal information will be available to anyone who does a domain look up. Who's pushing that agenda? The entertainment industry as a way to "stop piracy".
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/changes-domain-name-rules-place-user-privacy-jeopardy
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/changes-domain-name-rules-place-user-privacy-jeopardy
Man of Honour
This gets recycled more times than my rubbish and the smell gets worse each time it pops up.
all that would happen, is they would get their own software that enables the strong encryption they require.
end result would be law abiding citizens with no security of their data and terrorists with what they have now.
we need to punish the few. not the masses. remove organised religion.
end result would be law abiding citizens with no security of their data and terrorists with what they have now.
we need to punish the few. not the masses. remove organised religion.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 3,524
oooooo slow down there. what you've done there is bring logic into it. the correct response is. lol tories, as people are simple and conservatives are bad and will take all your money!
They do. They also have a duty of care to protect users data from unauthorised access, whether that be "hackers" or unscrupulous governments (whether that be China, Zimbabwe or the UK - they still need to make legal requests).
When police forces have a legitimate reason for accessing data facebook et all can provide it, when a (correct) warrant is issued.
Unfortunately due to the amount of mass data collection going on by governments, much of it being illegal or unlawful, companies have to (by law) protect their customers data.
And the timing of all these announcements are always VERY convenient. It's like they want to use tragedies for political means to force through unpopular legislation...
Do it quickly to elicit the biggest emotional response and knee jerk reaction they can
Soldato
Not entirely sure how this would happen? It's already illegal not to open encrypted files when ordered to. It's impossible to stop people from acquiring things, especially when the Internet is here.
Which needs to change, and has been recommended for change (as one of the major points) by the Anderson report. All signs are suggesting the politicians are going to ignore the recommendation to remove the warrant authority from politicians and hand them back to the judiciary however.
That's ignoring the reason this is all coming about though, which is the warrant less bulk collection of data.
That's the problem. If someone doesn't want to open their encrypted files, they don't have to. They can do the time for it. Or they can be beaten with a wrench until they give up the password, but if it gets out the security services and government are doing that to their own citizens, there'd be a **** fit.
What the government wants is control over companies encryption keys. I used to use Lavabit mail. The same mail provider Edward Snowden used. One day it went down. And didn't come back up. The guy who ran it posted to the site that the government had demanded he hand over the encryption keys for the site, because they were after Snowdens account. But handing over the keys would have opened up everyone elses accounts to snooping. So rather than hand over the keys, he closed the service. In the last couple of years, the owner of Lavabit and some EFF guys have been working on a new mail protocol that encryptions and sends encrypted by default.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Mail_Alliance
That's exactly what it is, and objectively speaking it makes perfect sense to time these announcements when public hysteria is running high. People tend to find policies much more reasonable when they provide a veneer of public safety.
We live in the UK. The number of terrorist attacks have decreased significantly over the last 10-15 years.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain
Let's not let facts get in the way eh.
Man of Honour
Good luck with actually implementing it.
Permabanned
Sorry, anyone backing this needs to get a reality check to see how much they think the media / government speak the truth.
You can't even begin to argue the stupidity of it.
You can't even begin to argue the stupidity of it.
Aren't you then punishing the masses due to the few...?
As much as I dislike religion there are billions of religious people on this planet, only a few nutters, many of who aren't religious.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 4,817
