• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    52 years ago

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

    • 520
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        42 years ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          22 years ago

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

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            10
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            They are talking about asymmetric encryption which has a keypair, private key (kept secret only by the owner) and a public key that is used by everyone that would send them a message. You can’t decrypt the message with the public key when it is encrypted using the public key, you must use the private key to decrypt it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      No they won’t. The bill is against social media companies, not your own encryption measures. Where the line exactly falls between hand-coding your own cypher; using good old PGP; using an app to encrypt but sending via a separate service; using an e2ee messaging app+service; being on a community/group-focused e2ee service; normal unencrypted-on-server social media… Going by the Reuters article (I haven’t read the actual bill) it seems mostly aimed at main social media platforms, with a to-be-explored relationship with private messages.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        Yes, like that, thanks for it. was thinking about something that captures the screen and uses OCR to take the encrypted text and then decrypts it. But that would be complicated and would need to be adapted for every app

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      172 years ago

      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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Where there is money to be made, and influence to be pedaled, Capitalism will find the person to do it for them. If you are doing it because you are evil you are a conservative, if you are doing it because you think you are actually helping the children, you are a liberal. But the outcomes are the same either way.

      • 👁️👄👁️
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13
        edit-2
        2 years 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.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    LONDON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - Britain’s long-awaited Online Safety Bill setting tougher standards for social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube and TikTok has been agreed by parliament and will soon become law, the government said on Tuesday.

    “Today, this government is taking an enormous step forward in our mission to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online,” she said.

    Once the bill receives royal assent and becomes law, social media platforms will be expected to remove illegal content quickly or prevent it from appearing in the first place.

    They will also be expected to prevent children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content like pornography by enforcing age limits and age-checking measures.

    Instead it will require companies to take action to stop child abuse on their platforms and as a last resort develop technology to scan encrypted messages, it has said.

    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”.


    The original article contains 334 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 48%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • Em Adespoton
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      Unlikely; more likely it will lead to UK politicians finding out that, like Russia, the UK isn’t as big a deal internationally as they assume it is at home.

      • Dudewitbow
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        To take a recent example, Microsoft considered just completely leaving the UK gaming console market if it fully blocked the buyout of blizzard activision, as it already won elsewhere and had good trial against the FTC in the U.S.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Big corporations threaten shit all the time and then they do a complete 180 two weeks later. Take any “threat” from a corporation with 5 metric tons of salt. They’ll all whatever PR statement they think will generate the most shot term buzz.

      • interolivary
        link
        fedilink
        22 years 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

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    132 years ago

    “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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      62 years 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    312 years ago

    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?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      232 years ago

      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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          Does that mean that when you’re sitting on a bench in the middle of a city, you could in theory snoop the passwords and banking details in clear text from the WiFi networks around you?

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      That’s the lovely bit about putting a bill out there. The enforcement and feasibility is not the problem of the politicians anymore.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    82 years ago

    Are VPNs in the UK getting banned? If e2ee is getting banned for “online safety,” many apps are at risk, but doesn’t that mean that you could just install the apps via a VPN?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      42 years ago

      Encryption isn’t banned. The government could just ask service providers to decrypt content at any time, allegedly so that it can be scanned for child abuse. This is impossible with e2ee, so such services may become impossible to operate in the UK.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    112 years ago

    The thumbnail for this article really bothers me. They just copy pasted the same string of 1’s and 0’s throughout the entire screen and colored it lime green on a black background for that Matrix effect.

    • Em Adespoton
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

      I thought it was apropos… just as fake as the encryption solution now enshrined in law in the UK.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    132 years ago

    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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 years 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?