UK home secretary Amber Rudd thinks real people don't care about encryption

[Jinchu]

Quote

Encryption is "severely limiting our agencies' ability to stop terrorist attacks"

--

"Real people often prefer ease of use and a multitude of features to perfect, unbreakable security ... Who uses WhatsApp because it is end-to-end encrypted, rather than because it is an incredibly user-friendly and cheap way of staying in touch with friends and family? Companies are constantly making trade-offs between security and 'usability', and it is here where our experts believe opportunities may lie."

Source: http://nordic.businessinsider.com/home-secretary-amber-rudd-real-people-dont-need-end-to-end-encryption-terrorists-2017-8

 

I get it. It is scary not to be in control. It is scary that someone might be planning horrible things and there is no way for the government to access the discussion. However, this is not new. Modern encryption algorithms have been around since the 70's. Modern governments have better capabilities for surveillance than ever. More importantly when there is a weak point in security someone (probably not a good guy) will exploit it. Then the normal people will suffer. 

[desertcomputer]

I still think good old human intelligence always better, terrorist could just use a additional encryption/secret code (with their own secret key)which makes breaking the app encryption kinda useless. 

 

edit: Plus they could just move onto a new application or even create their own or hosted by them, like mumble is great example. It took me around 5mins to setup on a my server and deployed. 

[Megah3rtz]

I'm pretty sure she's right. average people probably don't even know what encryption is.

[You_are_a_cunt]

As opposed to fake people, right?

[sof006]

Remove encryption and the terrorists will move onto another form of communication where they wont be caught. Simple logic for someone who doesn't want to be caught.

[LAwLz]

10 minutes ago, Megah3rtz said:

I'm pretty sure she's right. average people probably don't even know what encryption is.

True, but if you asked a "real person" if they cared whether or not ISIS extremists can read their messages then I think all of them will suddenly be very eager to have encryption.

[Jinchu]

9 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

True, but if you asked a "real person" if they cared whether or not ISIS extremists can read their messages then I think all of them will suddenly be very eager to have encryption.

Hmm. also even when they do not care, what should be done. Could it be that end-to-end encryption by default protects an average person without them knowing about it?

[Taf the Ghost]

My first thought is, "this is why Brexit happened, you dolts".

 

My second thought is, "it's not the English, Scottish or Welsh that are your problem".

 

George Orwell really had the British Elites dead to rights.

[Tiwaz]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

thats what you get if you dont support liberalism enough, you end up with a way too big government

[Jurrunio]

When you are too dumb for this.... Only bad guys just as stupid as her will be caught because of the removal of encryption in these apps. Those who are smarter will still have their communications encrypted. Civillians will have less security though.

[Taf the Ghost]

Just now, Jurrunio said:

When you are too dumb for this.... Only bad guys just as stupid as her will be caught because of the removal of encryption in these apps. Those who are smarter will still have their communications encrypted. Civillians will have less security though.

Generally speaking the Muslim Terrorists are the really dumb ones. That's why they get used. The ring leaders aren't normally going to be caught because they're actually semi-competent.

 

The saddest part about this, knowing too much about this area of things, is this simply isn't targeted at "terrorists". This is wholly about preventing citizens from expressing displeasure from their governments. That's why it's cropping up in all of the Western governments suddenly. The current Elites understand if we got actual information about what they've been up to, they're all going to get executed. It's the reason why there's never any "reasonable" debate about topics in the media. Once you can call a spade, a spade, the entire edifice they've built falls apart. The problem is pretty impressively clear when you point out, "it's Muslims; this is what they've done for 1400 years." 

 

It's takes all of 20-30 men in properly aligned cells to make a major city unlivable. Modern Infrastructure is very fragile and requires high societal trust to operate. That's what they're actually afraid of: the citizens of their own countries determining their lives. The first half of the 21st century is going to be a rolling collection of interior revolts and former governments sent to the gallows because the Elites decided 100 years ago to replace the populations. Yet none of them now pushing this insanity even understand why they're doing it. The UK has gotten their rivers of blood, and there's only more to come.

[TidaLWaveZ]

"If you don't have anything to hide you have nothing to worry about."

 

-Ignorance

[Mister Snow]

Yes, I'm sure Pinocchio cared about encryption before he became a real boy. Now he doesn't bother with frivolous things like privacy.

 

On a serious note, UK has become a complete surveillance country and just when I think there's nothing else they can do, they think of something new.

[Bananasplit_00]

yes im sure lots of people dont care, but getting rid of it isnt going to help, you can still just encrypt the messages you are sending through the app, it will just harm to remove the encryption outside of the goverment "feeling safe" or whatever

[Jito463]

2 hours ago, Tiwaz said:

thats what you get if you dont support liberalism enough, you end up with a way too big government

Here in the US, it's the "Liberals" (a.k.a. progressives/regressives) that are growing the size of government.

[Tiwaz]

14 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Here in the US, it's the "Liberals" (a.k.a. progressives/regressives) that are growing the size of government.

i didnt want to bring inb too much politics, but yea I agree

[Scruffy90]

Replace real people with general public and she may be correct. Every time these conversations come up in the public eye, there is always a very large group that shrugs it off and say things like "we have nothing to hide," etc. There has to be a way to educate the general public to be proactive instead of reactive.

[paddy-stone]

I love the way they keep moving the goalposts, saying that the snoopers charter that came into being, had to come in to "fight the terrorist threats".

Not that anyione with a grain of common sense believed them.. Now we get told that encryption is the devil and so on and so forth.

Our shitty government is erroding all of our rights, slowly but surely (actually not that slowly either).

[TOMPPIX]

dptDLobOFXkwa1F2BC12na0nMWn/VhqroBPiErVISe/TTs/0uoMUFH6Pj/hI3UGQNGFUS3+96+Yp6kOaqUouUjM+l3UOyeJwDhBB04yV4S1oZs6Ft6CBn9O22u4V5iNWpfUxN9ox8KLzgBgue1hvZ82YN+QNTa1tsSGqhHyOji5NylyghtUo2jQbsOwABISHWzuN6ZNhBJsfcV0osICm3A==

AES 256bit 

BIG BALLS

[jaggysnake57]

On 02/08/2017 at 10:50 AM, MrUnknownEMC said:

I still think good old human intelligence always better, terrorist could just use a additional encryption/secret code (with their own secret key)which makes breaking the app encryption kinda useless. 

 

edit: Plus they could just move onto a new application or even create their own or hosted by them, like mumble is great example. It took me around 5mins to setup on a my server and deployed. 

 

On 02/08/2017 at 10:57 AM, sof006 said:

Remove encryption and the terrorists will move onto another form of communication where they wont be caught. Simple logic for someone who doesn't want to be caught.

 

 

 

On 02/08/2017 at 11:38 AM, Jurrunio said:

When you are too dumb for this.... Only bad guys just as stupid as her will be caught because of the removal of encryption in these apps. Those who are smarter will still have their communications encrypted. Civillians will have less security though.

 

22 hours ago, Scruffy90 said:

Replace real people with general public and she may be correct. Every time these conversations come up in the public eye, there is always a very large group that shrugs it off and say things like "we have nothing to hide," etc. There has to be a way to educate the general public to be proactive instead of reactive.

alot of you miss the point.

1 the average person dosnt care about the government reading there messages because most of them have nothing to hide, and when faced with the idea of catching people that could potentially harm there loved ones they will happily allow the government all the powers it wants.......

2 if you remove end to end then yes terrorist groups will simply move on to another platform, but thats the point. you are making things harder for them, you are frustrating them. its a tactic.if the government cant access information from messaging services like whatsapp any way then the terrorists moving to another platform that they cant read is no different other than mainstream readily available services are no longer safe

 

On 02/08/2017 at 11:31 AM, Taf the Ghost said:

My first thought is, "this is why Brexit happened, you dolts".

 

My second thought is, "it's not the English, Scottish or Welsh that are your problem".

 

George Orwell really had the British Elites dead to rights.

this has nothing to do with brexit......not even close.

 

On 02/08/2017 at 11:01 AM, LAwLz said:

True, but if you asked a "real person" if they cared whether or not ISIS extremists can read their messages then I think all of them will suddenly be very eager to have encryption.

your argument is "think of the children" in a different form ......its scaremongering.

[LAwLz]

5 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

your argument is "think of the children" in a different form ......its scaremongering.

I don't see how, but feel free to think that if you want.

But don't worry, I got way more arguments up my sleeve so I don't have to rely on just "think of the children".

[themctipers]

Regular people don't really care about encryption, but they will care after you tell them any site in which you need to login and it doesn't have the little green lock in the top right hand corner, that information could be intercepted. Aka HTTPS. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Translation: don't worry, we can count on your stupidity to pass any law we want.

 

44 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

1 the average person dosnt care about the government reading there messages because most of them have nothing to hide,

Nice theory. It doesn't survive the "dick pic test", though.

Spoiler

 

 

44 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

and when faced with the idea of catching people that could potentially harm there loved ones they will happily allow the government all the powers it wants.......

No, not really. I mean, some, for sure. You have plenty of counter-examples in this thread alone as well.

44 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

2 if you remove end to end then yes terrorist groups will simply move on to another platform,

They will move assuming they currently are on said platform. You are telling me terrorist groups organize themselves through Whatsapp. I'd be glad to see the evidence.

 

44 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

your argument is "think of the children" in a different form ......its scaremongering.

Actually, this:

Quote

 hide, and when faced with the idea of catching people that could potentially harm there loved ones 

is literally a "think of the children" argument.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

1 the average person dosnt care about the government reading there messages because most of them have nothing to hide, and when faced with the idea of catching people that could potentially harm there loved ones they will happily allow the government all the powers it wants.......

The average person got a ton of things to hide. A completely normal UK citizen will break the law on average one time per day. That's 365 times in a year.

They also got things such as private information (pictures and conversations) that they would be very embarrassed and ashamed of if it was shown to people other than the intended receptions. As the dick pic video linked above shows, people do care about their private photos.

 

Even if we pretend like only be the government that will have access to messages (they wouldn't, because backdoors will inevitably get leaked or discovered), the entire argument is based on the fact that the average person has complete trust in the government and that it will always have it.

Considering how Trump recently became president, I think that's a very wrong assumption to make. Even if you agree with Trump and think he is great, a lot of people think differently. Imagine if Trump started compiling a list of all Muslims in the country using data harvested from private conversations as evidence. Do you really think all US citizens would be OK with that?

 

Also, you are literally quoting nazi propaganda when you say "nothing to hide, nothing to fear". The nazi party clearly demonstrated why some people might want to hide some facts from the government.

 

 

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

2 if you remove end to end then yes terrorist groups will simply move on to another platform, but thats the point. you are making things harder for them, you are frustrating them. its a tactic.if the government cant access information from messaging services like whatsapp any way then the terrorists moving to another platform that they cant read is no different other than mainstream readily available services are no longer safe

You can not remove end-to-end-encryption. There is absolutely no way of eliminating it.

All that the terrorists would need to do in order to completely circumvent this ban would be to develop their own messaging program. Hell, they wouldn't even need to develop their own, there are several open source ones such as Wire already available.

How do you think the government will stop an open source program from being used? They can't. You can't prevent people from using math formulas that anyone can already look up and write down.

[Jurrunio]

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

alot of you miss the point.

1 the average person dosnt care about the government reading there messages because most of them have nothing to hide, and when faced with the idea of catching people that could potentially harm there loved ones they will happily allow the government all the powers it wants.......

2 if you remove end to end then yes terrorist groups will simply move on to another platform, but thats the point. you are making things harder for them, you are frustrating them. its a tactic.if the government cant access information from messaging services like whatsapp any way then the terrorists moving to another platform that they cant read is no different other than mainstream readily available services are no longer safe

 

this has nothing to do with brexit......not even close.

1. You will need a poll to prove that your point is supported by most people. Before that, use "some people" instead.

 

2. Any examples of an authoritarianism government that's good? Bad things happen when your government becomes your parent

 

3. Mere annoyance cannot stop large terrorist groups like ISIS. It's just like trying to stop bankers from grabbing on more money by forcing them to spend more in charity.

 

4. "if the government cant access information from messaging services like whatsapp any way then the terrorists moving to another platform that they cant read is no different other than mainstream readily available services are no longer safe", so from what you said, this has no benefits but has harmed safety of the people?