UK defends plan to demand access to encrypted messages to protect children
reuters.com
reuters.com
Notes from my 5 years in China: - Use a protocol like trojan-gfw over cloudflare. It 1: hides the fact that you’re using a VPN and looks like normal https traffic, 2: Is open source and the Trojan-go/v2ray repositories are well tested in nightmarish environments like China. 3: Cloudfare obscures the IP address of your server from the government. - You can have your server use something like Mullvad so that your traffic blends into the crowd (of customers) - Always have an emergency protocol that is unlikely to get blocked. I wrote my own custom implementation of HTTPS over DNS for when they decide to cut off general internet access to sites outside the country. (Happens every month or so for a few days) - For messaging, use a fully open source & end to end encrypted & federated protocol that you can self host. Matrix.org is blocked in China but self hosting still allows you to contact people on the main server.
The thing is, currently nothing works in the UK, so if you think you'll be able to dispute anything...
This just isn't credible.
"Trust us, we have a safety mechanism in place."
What safety mechanism? Can they elaborate, especially when they're asking for backdoors/tools that will enable them to view private messages of anybody using the platform?
This is just a complete violation of individual privacy rights. Hope there's other apps and platforms out there that will operate just out of the governments eyes that will still offer encrypted messaging.
I'm not an encryption guru and I don't know the specifics about how they want to add a backdoor to these apps, but can't we generate our own keys to share between people we want to communicate with, removing the need to have these apps provide encryption?
Never trust your government (at least in the western world! Some european countries do actually care about their people). They don't care about you one bit other than your ability to shut up and pay taxes. You are a resource to them and if they can control you by reading your messages and punishing you if try and go against their rules, they will.
"How can a French protester be arrested under British terrorism laws in London?" - https://theconversation.com/how-can-a-french-protester-be-ar...
"Terror law used for Iceland deposits" - https://www.ft.com/content/abf583de-9546-11dd-aedd-000077b07...
But hey, "they must have done something, that surely won't happen to me, if I stay put and say yes to everything". Such freedom.
"Low level" crime is essentially legalised because Police has been defunded and demoralised. If someone reports abuse, most likely it will be dismissed until the risk for reaching tabloid headline is too high. Then they'll need evidence, ideally case completely "solved", before they even start doing anything.
So that tells me the purpose for this law isn't protection of children, because the government couldn't care less about children welfare, as government is engaging themselves in abuse by running down the economy and forcing thousands of children to go hungry.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/father-who-battered-dau...
Because...his daughter said she still loved him
Bringing unlocked devices to school should be not allowed, they should be confiscated.
This way kids will be in a safe, fully controlled environment.
The problem that Microsoft, Google and manufacturers do not want to invest in this. Meta doesn't want to create a kid version of Facebook, Microsoft doesn't want to make a locked version of Windows, Samsung doesn't want to make a locked phone, etc. You cannot show ads to kids, you cannot collect their data, so they are an unwanted audience, a nuisance.
Proposed ban on encryption doesn't prevent teenagers from typing "adult video" in Google. On a locked phone, a locked version of Google would show an educational video about an international economy for this query. Also, ban on encryption won't prevent a criminal from abroad from interacting with children.
If one could make the argument that the police force was 1)staffed with smart, moral, motivated, and well trained individuals, and 2) had adequate capacity and resources to pursue these crimes, and the only thing standing in their way was encryption, I’d at least be willing to entertain the conversation, but since little emphasis seems to be placed and 1&2, it’s hard to take this line of argument seriously.
There's nothing in that book you couldn't justify with "think of the children".
It seems that, as usual, the only way to escape tyranny is emigration, but I worry one day we'll run out of freer countries to emigrate to.
The delusional belief that you can back door crypto without breaking it, and the willingness of reporters to regurgitate nonsense remains obnoxious.
Britain now has a whole ruling class where even labour leaders have gone to rich private schools.
Ps: here in Holland it's not much better but I understand better why people vote for the party that doesn't actually represent their interests. With Britain I'm too far away to understand this.
Take the housing market, when there was no regulations we ended up with inadequate housing and the poor being housed in terrible conditions. Now we brought in all the wrong regulations and it's no longer just the poor who are struggling. Next we'll vote for universal rent control, do nothing else and sooner or later nobody will be able to move.
Edit: and if we completely nationalize it we might end up with inadequate commie blocks for everyone.
oh no! the horror of everyone having a home that's ugly on the outside!
If you actually knew anything about soviet buildings this was pretty far from the truth. Multiple families were often assigned to share kitchens/bathrooms and often just one or two rooms per family to live in. They were not well designed, poorly heated and ventilated and generally pretty miserable places to live. It was not uncommon for the entire family to sleep huddled around the single kerosene heater.
They did get better as time went on but it wasn't really until the fall of the soviet union when a lot of these inadequate accommodations were demolished. Also i'm totally on board with having cheap to build ugly accommodation - so long as it's not 100% of the housing stock, By all means throw as much up as possible until we've housed all the poor, but what if i want something different?
*(with the focus of getting them to pay taxes - HMRC even today literally has no idea about the scale of tax avoidance, because they don't audit big corporations).
It should also be accompanied with "stick your head in the sand" if offered as any solution to any of this.
Mind you, it is the British way to stick your head in the sand and never complain.
But what do you propose? In this dysfunctional political system where most of the public wants a nanny state?
I think it's more that they are afraid to rock the boat or oppose authority than having convictions about a nanny state.
It's possible for "VPN will fix it" to exist with "Do things to actively resist government overreach" in the same individual.
They'll just block you from signing up or using the service.