this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
15 points (77.8% liked)

Privacy

31175 readers
351 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

So, looking at this article, there is no mention that they made end-to-end encryption illegal.

Tech companies have said scanning messages and end-to-end encryption are fundamentally incompatible.

Earlier this month, junior minister Stephen Parkinson appeared to concede ground, saying in parliament's upper chamber that Ofcom would only require them to scan content where "technically feasible".

So they would basically be scanning information WITHOUT end-to-end encryption

[–] MJBrune@beehaw.org 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No no this is Reddit, I mean lemmy, we don't read articles we just react.

[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

Well, it's more than that since OP even changed the title of the article.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Do they want to lose access to… everything on the internet? Because this is how you lose access to everything.

[–] ebits21@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago

Digital Brexit

[–] El_Dorado@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Haha yes definitely something to follow. I'm looking forward to lists of companies that left UK because of this (as announced) and lists of companies that stay and thus prove that their end-to-end encryption isn't a real one

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I keep forgetting that the UK left the European Union. When I originally read that title I was like how the fuck could that happen? Oh Brexit. That is going to set them back decades.

[–] Ihnivid@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Don't you worry, EU votes on killing end-to-end encryption in private messaging next week.

[–] interolivary@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] m0nky@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Jesus christ. Thanks for sharing, I had no idea about this.

[–] interolivary@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

This is by design; they've been very quiet about this. It's going to pass, and once it does I doubt it'll only be used for scanning for CSAM

[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If governments the world over were as obsessed with solving things like the climate crisis and cost of living as they are with undermining encryption techs, we'd be living in a utopia by now.

They tried this here in Australia, luckily for us it got voted down. Iirc there's been other countries trying the same BS

[–] Fluid@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What? It didn’t get voted down, it literally passed and is law under the Telco Act. The fact we passed it gave the UK ammunition to do the same thing.

[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago

it is my understanding that our sucky Assistance and Access Act, is fundamentally different, it compels developers provide back doors where it will not systemically undermine the system. To my understanding the UK one requests "breaking" e2ee in its entirely - which is why services like Signal were considering full exiting the region?

[–] sirico@feddit.uk 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

" Safety Bill " the fucking irony of it Tories making sure we're the biggest clown show in the world. Well time to shutdown all those https end points and spool up jhonlewi5.co.uk to my offshore account.

"If companies do not comply, media regulator Ofcom will be able to issue fines of up to 18 million pounds ($22.3 million) or 10% of their annual global turnover." Yet thier mates can quite happly steal tax money under PPE contracts and pump literal shit into our waterways.

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Not even the United States is as determined to become a third-wonld shithole as the UK is.

[–] ares35@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

republicans: "hold my beer"

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The common thing here is conservatism. It has no borders and thrives on hatred, which is fundamentally human. It will alway exist as an evil. It just varies on how much power they have and is under slightly different names, but they have a common thread of beliefs that always come back. No country or person is immune to this as morally superior they think they are.

[–] Kongar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I don’t get it - where did all these idiots come from in the western developed worlds? It’s like half have forgotten history, and are hell bent on sending us into this fascist dystopia where we’ve forgotten that freedom comes with a price. Nobody likes the darker side of the internet, but punishing regular users and businesses isn’t the answer. Everyone loves to pick on the USA, and we deserve it, but it’s happening seemingly everywhere.

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago

Because these people are always there, always waiting. We got lazy about stomping them down.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Okay so how would this be enforced? Highly unlikely any messaging service that offers E2E is going to release a version without it just to satisfy the UK government. So this will basically be easily thwarted by using a VPN?

[–] ADTJ@feddit.uk 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The bill was changed so it no longer bans e2e encryption, it's now the responsibility of tech companies to provide protection "where technically feasible" which basically means fuck all

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

where technically feasible

It gives something that can be argued about later, right? After other parts of the bill have begun to be implemented. So, further down the road if gvmt considers e.g. WhatsApp or Signal as having CSAM and not taking appropriate steps, then they can put pressure and WA/Signal can argue back about feasibility and merit.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Well, they already left the EU, now they want to leave the internet, too.

[–] NegativeLookBehind@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Literally facial recognition cameras at every single stop light in UK.

[–] iamnotme@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago

Literally not. Unless you think the UK doesn’t exist outside of London.

[–] KSPAtlas@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago

I wonder where the book was written and set, i wonder

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

We made it safe by making it so nobody can be safe. What are you people mot understanding?!

/s

[–] Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de 2 points 11 months ago

After Brexit there's Digital Brexit

[–] slurp@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago (5 children)

This is openly misleading. This sucks, sure, but it doesn't ban e2ee as the title suggests.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

"we want to break https, SSL, TLS, SSH..."

Man, operating servers in the UK is going to be FUN!

First of all, these protocols don't allow for backdoors so good luck with that. Are they going to ditch all those and run their own private internet or something?

Seriously, what they want isn't even possible, and even if it were, it won't. fix. anything.

Real criminals will just continue using these real encryption protocols that you cannot break, so this just ends with the state being able to spy on the common people.

And nobody will abuse this, if 50.000 pounds disappears from yout bank about then fuck you, shut up, you never had that...

Politicians are stupid.

[–] opt9@feddit.ch 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, the title of this post is misinformation. If you read the article it says: "The government, however, has said the bill does not ban end-to-end encryption." Even in extreme cases it says scanning will be required where "technically feasible."

People need to relax and pay attention.

[–] owf@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

First of all, these protocols don't allow for backdoors

Doesn't matter, tbh. The entire problem of giving governments (or whoever) a backdoor is that there's no way to make it only available to the "good guys".

If Apple and co did put in backdoors to satisfy the Brits, the first thing every other government on earth would do is legislate itself access to the backdoor.

With or without a proper backdoor, this law breaks the tech.

[–] ninjakitty7@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Is there anything I should be doing to protect myself from this bill if I live outside UK?

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 2 points 11 months ago

Yes, don't move to Slough

This is general life advice too

[–] library_napper@monyet.cc 1 points 11 months ago

There must be exceptions for banks. Otherwise, brb gonna steal some easy £

[–] sarmale@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Cant you just make a keyboard app that encrypts it for the recipient while you type it? Will they even ban that?

[–] 520@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There are logistical problems with that. Such as how you plan to get the key out to recipients.

[–] sarmale@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

When someone wants to start a conversation they send their public key unencrypted (no need for it to be encrypted) and then you send your public key It will be one more message but the keyboard could have some sort of "profiles" for every persons public key, that you could select (This is just an idea, I have no coding experience)

[–] 520@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Okay, but how do you then make sure that key isn't intercepted? Anyone who has the key can read your messages

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›