David Cameron wants to ban encryption

[xox]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f93_1390833151

 

I would watch that video, and see if you still think GCHQ and NSA are that different.

I agree that sometimes it goes too far, but at the end of the day, I don't believe that freedom should be supported over security at any cost, I believe that sometimes, we do have to use dirty tactics to obtain certain info as unfortunate as it is... That's just what I fundamentally believe in.

[flibberdipper]

I hope someone hacks into his PornHub account.

[tom564]

I agree that sometimes it goes too far, but at the end of the day, I don't believe that freedom should be supported over security at any cost, I believe that sometimes, we do have to use dirty tactics to obtain certain info as unfortunate as it is... That's just what I fundamentally believe in.

If you give up freedom for protection against terrorism you deserve neither and the terrorists win

[.:MARK:.]

I agree that sometimes it goes too far, but at the end of the day, I don't believe that freedom should be supported over security at any cost, I believe that sometimes, we do have to use dirty tactics to obtain certain info as unfortunate as it is... That's just what I fundamentally believe in.

Given the time, I don't think you have watched that video...

[xox]

If you give up freedom for protection against terrorism you deserve neither and the terrorists win

Again; and I've said this time and time again: It's about finding the right balance between freedom and surveillance.

 

 

Given the time, I don't think you have watched that video...

Did sort of already watch it

[handymanshandle]

At what cost? Your citzens, and they're paying you via taxes yet you want to compromise security of personal documents such as ones NIN/SSN/SIN. 

Only 17 people died (16 civilians, 1 officer) that's a lot less compared to worse incidents of terrorism (in terms of deaths or injuries) (I.E 11 Sept. 2001, 7 July 2005 London bombings, The Centennial Olympic Park bombing, etc.).

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

You're not compromising the right for the government to not be able to see what you're doing. If you don't like the Al 'Qaida Facebook page, you'll be fine. It is literally just criminals they're interested in, not you.

 

And why would the government want to see conversations with your psychologist friend now? They don't care about that. It's mundane, what they're after is something extraordinary, like a plot to blow up the houses of parliament or to kill the queen, they're here to protect us. Most of the fears of GCHQ are from people who need to remove their tin foil hats, it's just not logical.

But how do you identify the terrorists without going through the data of innocent citizen? And how can you make sure that all of the people who are being targeted for being terrorists are actual terrorists? I, for example, have talked to my friends about running amok in my school as a joke about people accusing video games to be responsible for violence. But how can I be sure that the GCHQ/NSA/whoever else gets the joke and doesn't think I'm actually serious? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if someone working at NSA/NSA has already manually looked through my communication data.

[tobben]

Yeah, I guess for some people, they want more, some people want less.

More on YouGov, however, the general consensus is that the government should be able to hack into people's stuff without questions asked:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/11/british-attitudes-intelligence-services/

 

Britain has different ideals though; some countries value privacy more, some value security more. In terms of the "a few million" point, even to get a million would be to have 1/64th of the population voting, which ain't going to happen.

Britain has strange ideals indeed..

 

was doing this whole writeup on the population, then i realized

you were specifically talking about Britain.

 

The poll i have in mind wouldn't necessarily have to be isolated 

to Britain.

Correction, wasn't isolated to Britain at all. This conversation

started on the basis of you saying everyone agrees that the internet

needs to be somewhat regulated. That certainly involves alot more

people than the tiny fraction living in Britain.

Edited January 12, 2015 by tobben

[xox]

Britain has strange ideals indeed..

 

was doing this whole writeup on the population, then i realized

you were specifically talking about Britain.

 

The poll i have in mind wouldn't necessarily have to be isolated 

to Britain.

Correction, wasn't isolated to Britain at all. This conversation

started on the basis of you saying everyone agrees that the internet

needs to be somewhat regulated. That certainly involves alot more

people than the tiny fraction living in Britain.

I suppose I assumed then that the conversation was about Britain's implementation of a security program. Sorry there.

[Almercenary]

David Cameron is what we commonly call a fuckwit.

I don't even think I need to elaborate

[jaggysnake57]

The Labour party, yes, but not Ed

 

And when it's rape/murder/terrorism, you see it as ok that people are just let off?

 

• Bedroom tax: Great in London; massive overcrowding problem and issue with council houses. However, I do think that it should've only been applied to greater London
• Welfare cuts did, we need to cut somewhere, something has to go. Unsustainable public spending is never good.
• Let's be serious, it's a good thing that there are less guns in the world now.
• You mean the 111 system that makes the 999 lines less congested? It has been in the pipeline for 30 years, my friend. Also, the NHS is more efficient now than it's ever been
• Universal Credit again made the system (which was really broken) more efficient
• Funnily enough, the conservative government has done more to stop tax avoidance than Labour did in the 70s raising the top rate of tax to 80%
• Michael Gove, the person who (yes) made a few mistakes but also made the education system more efficient; the Academy system (started under Blair) is generally better than the previous system started by Thatcher.

Not quite. Really, they have good reason to suspect you're guilty but then drop your case. It's called investigation.

 

ed runs the labour party and they still have a one point lead the next election will likely end in a hung parliament

 

regardless of the crime i would rather see a guilty man walk than an innocent man imprisoned....put it like this would yo be willing to spend the next 30 years in a maximum security prison with the worst this country has to offer so that more people are locked up?

 

bedroom tax was nothing to do with rehousing, that was the spin added by the government to sell it, it was a tax on the poor.  when it was analysed there was a shortfall of house that people affected by the bedroom tax could move into. this short fall was 93%....only 7% of people could actually move in to a house that allowed them to receive there full benefits. not to mention that many needed the extra room for carers and this was not included in the testing.

 

ahhh welfare cuts....something has to go.....so why has this government not touched pensioners? the DWPs budget is 150 billion of which 75 billion is spent on pensioners, in comparison the benefits that the tories have gone after account for roughly 25 billion. the welfare cuts were meant to save 25 billion over 5 years they saved 2.5. the deficit is 90 billion a year roughly. 

 

lets be serious we couldn't fight our way out of a wet paper bag right now but its not like there is a crisis in the middle east

 

you mean the 111 sytem that replaced the NHS direct system.....so they removed all the medically trained people from a call centre then replaced them with the same people that used to work in vodaphones call centre.  what really made me chuckle was the notion that the nhs is efficient......you clearly have not used it, nor do you seem to read, listen to or watch anything other than the tory times. A+e is in crisis, wait times are at there highest for some 10 -15 years so about 5  years after you were last in power, see a trend forming here? even the tories own ministers are saying the nhs is heading for a crash if its not changed soon. cancer treatments are being cut wait times are huge there are no beds its a mess.

 

UC is another debacle. its cost billions more than it was meant to, has caused massive issues in the places it was meant to be rolled out including increasing the amount of arrears tenants have...this from a scheme that was ment to pay landlords directly because people who claim benefits cannot be trusted!

 

the 70s. thats how far you need to go back. ill leave that there i think

 

i have close family that work in a school.  education is a mess, children slip though the cracks, ofstead is a joke, you know schools get warned when ofstead is coming in.  whats the point in that. i could right pages on the failings of education but i think i have been off topic for long enough

 

cameron has a track record of inserting is foot into his mouth and hes done it again.  whilst ii agree that total anonymity is bad and that criminal organisations will use it i also think that removing encrypted communications is a step too far. the reality is that attacks like that on charle hebdo will happen you can not stop all of them. 

[SIGSEGV]

http://thehackernews.com/2015/01/encrypted-messaging-apps.html

It seems that whenever there is a terrorist attack the government decides it gives them an excuse to snoop on our stuff even more, how stupid do they honestly think we are?

 

The terrible terrorist attacks in France forced the British Prime Minister David Cameron to consider banning the popular encrypted online messaging apps like Snapchat, CryptoCat, WhatsApp and Apple’s iMessage unless the companies don't give the UK government backdoor access to their encrypted communications.

 

Speaking at a public event in the UK this morning, Cameron said that if he wins the next election and re-elected, he would seek to ban the encrypted communication apps as part of his plans for new surveillance powers in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris. 

 

 

The British Prime Minister said the Paris terror attacks, including the one last week on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, outlined the need for greater access on the encrypted communications. In his remarks, the attacks were aimed at messaging apps that encrypt messages to secure users' communications.

"

The attacks in Paris demonstrated the scale of the threat that we face and the need to have robust powers through our intelligence and security agencies in order to keep our people safe

," Cameron 

said

.

Cameron outlined the government’s approach on secure communications that can’t be read by police or government agencies.

"

Are we going to allow a means of communications which it simply isn't possible to read?

" Cameron said Monday while campaigning, in reference to apps such as WhatsApp, Snapchat, and other encrypted services. "

My answer to that question is: 'No, we must not.' The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe.

"

Cameron acknowledged the "contentious" nature of this approach and reassured citizens that obtaining such data with permission from the apps would still require a warrant.

"

Let me stress again, this cannot happen unless the home secretary personally signs a warrant. We have a better system for safeguarding this very intrusive power than probably any other country that I can think of

," Cameron added.

Privacy groups have repeatedly criticised attempts to limit the use of privacy tools in the name of security. When the government announced plans to crack down on the dark net, for example, but privacy groups have warned that much of the tools are used by people in oppressed countries and victims of crime to stay safe.

"

We are concerned at the increasingly frequent use of the Internet to fuel hatred and violence and signal our determination to ensure that the Internet is not abused to this end,

" European Union politicians said in a joint 

statement

.

Encryption became a hot topic in the wake of the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations on NSA surveillance. The leaked files revealed that Skype has a backdoor, highlighted a broad online global surveillance of encryption companies. 

 

But the messaging companies such as WhatsApp remained committed to keeping their services encrypted so that the communications between their users remain unable to be read by authorities. 

 

The Prime Minister didn’t name specific apps that could be subject to the ban but a number of popular messaging apps that use encryption in some or the other form, including Snapchat, WhatsApp, iMessage and FaceTime, could be considered in the list.

[Castdeath97]

And now what I'm I gonna use in UK if your gonna ban all the popular apps my family knows how to use?

[The Crazed Child]

When governments want access to private data, everyone complains that it's an invasion of their privacy.

Yet when a major terrorist attack happens people complain about how incompetent the government is to not have stopped it.

[dadasmithywinkle]

*cough* already a thread on this *cough*

[Guest]

The main hole in that argument is that they can already read any specific communation if they really want to.

Even if a messaging service doesn't have security holes in it, they can compromise the devices running the service and run keylogger or a touchscreen device equivalent of it.

But going around compromising devices is not a feasible approach if you want to listen in on everything.

And that's what they're really after. Mass scale industrial, political espionage, automatic collection of dirt on journalists, activists etc.

[FluffiestPond]

Everybody start freaking the fuck out!!!

 

But seriously, this is the dude that tried to ban porn (Blacklist). Look how that went down? As far as I can tell I am still able to spill my man smoothie upon my desk legs thrice nightly... I mean... My friend said porn still works...

[SIGSEGV]

We're going to keep getting crap like this every time there is a terrorist attack...

[MrSuperb]

David Cameron, the senator of the 51st state.

[Humbug]

How can you effectively ban an app in a country? Will they force UK ISPs to firewall all Internet traffic like China does?

[SIGSEGV]

How can you effectively ban an app in a country? Will they force UK ISPs to firewall all Internet traffic like China does?

Lol, they already do that, they just give you a fake 404 page

[jayctech]

And the rest of the world realizes how stupid our government is.

[ShadowCaptain]

Everybody start freaking the fuck out!!!

 

But seriously, this is the dude that tried to ban porn (Blacklist). Look how that went down? As far as I can tell I am still able to spill my man smoothie upon my desk legs thrice nightly... I mean... My friend said porn still works...

 

that image......

[.spider.]

I bet his private W-Lan is already unencrypted, not.

[OLYCAT]

This revealed the existence of a secret GCHQ programme called Tempora, which taps into transatlantic internet cables to monitor millions of items of correspondence.

 

 

 

Secret? Hahahaha. They'll be claiming email keyword scanning is new next! :blink: