Amber Rudd fails to understand the internet

[Vonhelmet]

Didn't Amber Rudd support remain in the referendum campaign?

Yes, and so did Theresa May. It's almost as though they are unprincipled shysters.

 

[mmj_uk]

Isn't this the government going after proxy services and the like under the guise of this Whatsapp messaging thing? they're basically saying that they have a right to know what the contents of encrypted traffic is and the service provider has a duty to make it accessible. All for our safety of course.

 

[Nasher]

If theres one thing the government is clueless about, it's IT.

You can't have "back doors" in to encryption (because then everyone can use it and the encryption would be pointless) and you can't expect hosts to monitor everyone.

Trying to stop proxy services etc is also a total money pit. China has been trying it for over a decade and they still can't even stop TOR.

 

[antijoke]

Would it really hurt a politician to talk to someone who has some vague idea what they're talking about?

Yes it would, they like to think the know it all, this would hurt their fragile little minds too much to admit, and accept.

 

[scorza]

Time for a dose of reality from respected Tech market analyst Richard Holway: http://www.techmarketview.com/ukhot...26/backlash-against-goole-and-facebook-mounts

Last Tuesday, I wrote a HotViews post - Google and Facebook should face up to their responsibilities. That was before the Westminster attack.

The backlash against Google, and its Youtube channel, had been gathering pace before the attack. Media companies ARE responsible for their content. Google just cannot say ‘We are a tech company and therefore have no responsibility for our content’ when it is that very content that drives users -and therefore advertisers - to their sites. I am sure Google will find it ‘inconvenient’ and ‘expensive’ to monitor its content - but that’s the fair price they have to pay. Just like the way the regulators have regulated the rest of the media which has suffered as Google and their like have sucked their very lifeblood from their advertising revenues.

Since Westminster, the focus has turned to WhatsApp and its owner Facebook. The nutter (because that is what I increasingly think he was), who perpetrated this heinous crime, communicated on the encrypted WhatApps moments before he ploughed into innocent bystanders on Westminster Bridge and went onto to murder PC Palmer. I don’t think there is any sane person alive who would argue for Facebook withholding access to that message. If they do then, sorry, I’d be all in favour of legislation to force them to do so.

As I have said before, the likes of Google and Facebook MUST face up to their responsibilities. But I think the same of Uber and Airbnb. They too should understand that they must abide by the same regulation - and taxes - that are ‘suffered’ by their more conventional competitors. There really cannot be ‘one rule for them’ - and another for ‘the rest’. That way we will all be losers.

 

[adolf hamster]

The intelligent agencies should have the ability to view these mesaages. I'm with the government on this one. There should have course be channels to check and not let them abuse these powers.

there are channels to prevent abuse, it's called a court warrant, and it already exists.

 

[Greebo]

Time for a dose of reality from respected Tech market analyst Richard Holway: http://www.techmarketview.com/ukhot...26/backlash-against-goole-and-facebook-mounts

Isnt he as a Tech totally missing the point that Whatsapp and Facebook don't know what was in that message as they have no access to it? So they are not witholding access, they just don;t have access.

Which then brings in the whole back door to encryption that companies might be forced to introduce which leads to any secure system with a backdoor is no secure and fit for purpose.

I won't go into how a UK government can force an IT company based Silicon Valley to even introduce a back door.

 

[cheesyboy]

Time for a dose of reality from respected Tech market analyst Richard Holway: http://www.techmarketview.com/ukhot...26/backlash-against-goole-and-facebook-mounts

Are Facebook/Whatsapp really withholding access to anything?

They're doing nothing of the sort. Just populist bullcrap from your 'respected tech market analyst'

 

[Mynight]

Rubbish Facebook would jump at the chance to read messages. At the moment they can't so it's not witholding anything as it doesn't have them.

A " dose of reality" is that if you force these companies into compliance another will take their place. Next in line will be the homegrown software that is readily available and relatively simple to set up. How do you force compliance from the very people that don't want to show their messages(or are dead).

 

[Screeeech]

I've been in the US for the past 2 weeks on business, one of the guys I was with had a piece of tape over the webcam on his laptop, a year or two ago I'd have laughed something like "hahaaa what a paranoid idiot!!1" but I'm honestly not laughing now..

Their level of understanding regarding reality, the world - technology and how it fits into society is so low, for the first time in my entire life - I actually feel like throwing things at these people, I seriously just cannot stand the levels of sheer bloody dumbness coming out of the government right now.

 

[G J]

Yet theres people on this forum that want to take the rights of what they consider idiots/noobs and let the goverment make all the choices for them as people are just so dumb and stupid.

On topic: Terrorists will just move onto other forms of software/communication.

 

[edscdk]

The intelligent agencies should have the ability to view these mesaages. I'm with the government on this one. There should have course be channels to check and not let them abuse these powers.

but you know they will abuse the powers...

initially nothing much will happen... 15 years down the line you will jokingly message a friend "ill kill the next cop that pulls me for speeding" and you will be straight in front of a judge charged with terrorist plotting...it will probably come to nothing but you will have spent months in jail, 1000's on solicitors and you will be on the "terrorist" register with all your communication being monitored in depth...

 

[datalol-jack]

Didn't Amber Rudd support remain in the referendum campaign?

Both May and Rudd did. The former at least notionally on the balance of the economic case; however, May's privacy-shredding quest is long standing, and would have continued in any position she held in the cabinet; further, the court and the international law she wants to dodge is a separate institution all of its own. Rudd will follow her boss. Both have a rather draconian take atm, and a very relaxed grasp of the technological implications of the legislation they are cooking up. Though it's Rudd who's the fall sock puppet for this. They sent her out to see how the public would react.

 

[Mynight]

I suspect the general public reaction will be along the lines of "Yeah burn Facebook, Google they're helping terrorphiles" and it will proceed with little backlash like snoopers.

 

[FishFluff]

Time for a dose of reality from respected Tech market analyst Richard Holway: http://www.techmarketview.com/ukhot...26/backlash-against-goole-and-facebook-mounts

He may be a 'tech market analyst' but he's every bit as clueless as Rudd. I'll say it again - the only way to read messages sent over encrypted channels like WhatsApp is to compromise one of the devices involved. Something the UK government already has both a legal means to demand and the tools to do. Explain why you think the rest of the population should be under surveillance.

 

[dowie]

Something the UK government already has both a legal means to demand and the tools to do.

while I don't agree with this idea of mandating back doors for end to end encrypted comms it isn't clear the govt does have the means - as far as the legal means is concerned, the phone's owner is dead - as far as the tools to break into the phone themselves is concerned, that isn't quite clear - the US govt (FBI) couldn't break into an iPhone previously when investigating a terror suspect, Apple refused to help and in the end they relied on an Israeli security firm to do it (IIRC)

 

[adolf hamster]

while I don't agree with this idea of mandating back doors for end to end encrypted comms it isn't clear the govt does have the means - as far as the legal means is concerned, the phone's owner is dead - as far as the tools to break into the phone themselves is concerned, that isn't quite clear - the US govt (FBI) couldn't break into an iPhone previously when investigating a terror suspect, Apple refused to help and in the end they relied on an Israeli security firm to do it (IIRC)

i'm surprised they didn't just brute force it, or use analysis of fb pages etc to make an educated guess at the password.

maybe less of an issue with fingerprint sensors coming in- can still access phones when the fellow is dead.

 

[dowie]

i'm surprised they didn't just brute force it, or use analysis of fb pages etc to make an educated guess at the password.

maybe less of an issue with fingerprint sensors coming in- can still access phones when the fellow is dead.

the problem is that you can't brute force it, you get a limited number of attempts

 

[scorza]

while I don't agree with this idea of mandating back doors for end to end encrypted comms it isn't clear the govt does have the means - as far as the legal means is concerned, the phone's owner is dead - as far as the tools to break into the phone themselves is concerned, that isn't quite clear - the US govt (FBI) couldn't break into an iPhone previously when investigating a terror suspect, Apple refused to help and in the end they relied on an Israeli security firm to do it (IIRC)

IIRC the "workaround" the Israeli firm used is only available on iPhone 5Cs.

 

[Mynight]

There was a flaw in the iphone 6 IIRC where you could brute force it essentially by spoofing/cloning the hardware key onto a server then brute forcing an image of the phone rather than the phone itself.

Not sure if it was defeated in the 7 or subsequent ios updates/not even sure if you can.