quote:


Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banned-from-offering-out-of-reach-communications-under-new-laws.html

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to under the Investigatory Powers Bill

Internet and social media companies will be banned from putting customer communications beyond their own reach under new laws to be unveiled on Wednesday.

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Measures in the Investigatory Powers Bill will place in law a requirement on tech firms and service providers to be able to provide unencrypted communications to the police or spy agencies if requested through a warrant.

The move follows concerns that a growing number of encryption services are now completely inaccessible apart from to the users themselves.

It came as David Cameron, the Prime Minister, pleaded with the public and MPs to back his raft of new surveillance measures.

He said terrorists, paedophiles and criminals must not be allowed a “safe space” online.
...

quote:


Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/28/government_will_not_pass_laws_to_ban_encryption_says_baroness_shields/
...
"The question remains, are we going to allow a means of communication where it simply isn't possible to [intercept]?" Cameron continued. "And my answer to that is: no, we must not. The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe."

quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:


Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banned-from-offering-out-of-reach-communications-under-new-laws.html

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to under the Investigatory Powers Bill

Internet and social media companies will be banned from putting customer communications beyond their own reach under new laws to be unveiled on Wednesday.

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Measures in the Investigatory Powers Bill will place in law a requirement on tech firms and service providers to be able to provide unencrypted communications to the police or spy agencies if requested through a warrant.

The move follows concerns that a growing number of encryption services are now completely inaccessible apart from to the users themselves.

It came as David Cameron, the Prime Minister, pleaded with the public and MPs to back his raft of new surveillance measures.

He said terrorists, paedophiles and criminals must not be allowed a “safe space” online.
...

The framing battle cries "for the children!" or "to thwart terrorism!" are getting a little tiresome, even with a British accent.

quote:


Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/28/government_will_not_pass_laws_to_ban_encryption_says_baroness_shields/
...
"The question remains, are we going to allow a means of communication where it simply isn't possible to [intercept]?" Cameron continued. "And my answer to that is: no, we must not. The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe."

I thought the first duty of government was to protect the rights of its citizens...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:


Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banned-from-offering-out-of-reach-communications-under-new-laws.html

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to under the Investigatory Powers Bill

Internet and social media companies will be banned from putting customer communications beyond their own reach under new laws to be unveiled on Wednesday.

Companies such as Apple, Google and others will no longer be able to offer encryption so advanced that even they cannot decipher it when asked to, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Measures in the Investigatory Powers Bill will place in law a requirement on tech firms and service providers to be able to provide unencrypted communications to the police or spy agencies if requested through a warrant.

The move follows concerns that a growing number of encryption services are now completely inaccessible apart from to the users themselves.

It came as David Cameron, the Prime Minister, pleaded with the public and MPs to back his raft of new surveillance measures.

He said terrorists, paedophiles and criminals must not be allowed a “safe space” online.
...

The framing battle cries "for the children!" or "to thwart terrorism!" are getting a little tiresome, even with a British accent.

quote:


Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/28/government_will_not_pass_laws_to_ban_encryption_says_baroness_shields/
...
"The question remains, are we going to allow a means of communication where it simply isn't possible to [intercept]?" Cameron continued. "And my answer to that is: no, we must not. The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe."

I thought the first duty of government was to protect the rights of its citizens...

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Well, it is a Tory government, and they have no desire to protect the rights of their citizens, much like our nutsuckers here at home.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Well, that legislation would totally fuck any encrypted communications that our military uses.
I know, I wrote it.... more than 25 years ago.
It uses 128-byte (not bit) double encryption that is totally destructive.
There is no key stored within the files or the messages and it doesn't use the usual 'encrypt and delete the source' methodology.
Maybe those stoopid law-makers have no idea. lol.
Or perhaps, the military are exempt from such laws???
If we ever got a 'Snowden' episode here, they'd be completely fucked.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Well, that legislation would totally fuck any encrypted communications that our military uses.

I know, I wrote it.... more than 25 years ago.
It uses 128-byte (not bit) double encryption that is totally destructive.
There is no key stored within the files or the messages and it doesn't use the usual 'encrypt and delete the source' methodology.
...

quote:

Have you ever seen a 'poor' politician?? I haven't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Well, that legislation would totally fuck any encrypted communications that our military uses.

I know, I wrote it.... more than 25 years ago.
It uses 128-byte (not bit) double encryption that is totally destructive.
There is no key stored within the files or the messages and it doesn't use the usual 'encrypt and delete the source' methodology.
...

Shenanigans.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Smacks of one rule for them and another rule for everyone else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Well, that legislation would totally fuck any encrypted communications that our military uses.

I know, I wrote it.... more than 25 years ago.
It uses 128-byte (not bit) double encryption that is totally destructive.
There is no key stored within the files or the messages and it doesn't use the usual 'encrypt and delete the source' methodology.
...

Shenanigans.

I worked for the military behind the scenes.
I know a lot of what went on and my part in it all.
Like a dutiful soldier - I did was I paid to do.

The point I was making was that they are trying to make something that the private companies can be forced to hand over if the secret services require it.
Snowden-style revelations wouldn't work on encrypted military systems and should such a thing require to be unraveled to expose wrong-doings, they'd be completely fucked because all they could hand over would be the encrypted info for code-breakers to figure out.

Sort-of defeats the point of having such a law doesn't it?
Smacks of one rule for them and another rule for everyone else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
My Uncle used to get a magazine that openly advertised missiles. MISSILES ! Come on here. I can understand being pissed off at your neighbors but that is short range. You cannot use those missiles on your nextdoor neighbors.