this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
264 points (96.5% liked)

Privacy

32517 readers
339 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

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nosurprises@lemm.ee 108 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"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.

Somebody tell her that "online" in the UK and anywhere else in the world is the same "online".

[–] El_Dorado@beehaw.org 56 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Haha yes also incredibly that they had to point out this sentence "Tech companies have said scanning messages and end-to-end encryption are fundamentally incompatible."

Very astonishing how there are some fundamental lacks of understanding from politicians advertising this. Or all on purpose

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

That's not a given. Imagine messaging is like you trying to pass a note to a classmate in school. End-to-end encryption is like using a cypher based on your friend's social security number, crumpling up the note, and then shoving the note up Tommy's ass for them to deliver it to your buddy. Pretty standard note-passing stuff.

Adding the ability for the government to scan your messages is like being that kid who can't write without mouthing or whispering what you're writing. Then the teacher says "got it! Don't worry, I definitely definitely won't discuss this in the beak room with the other teachers!" And then gives you a big reassuring wink and a smile while you shove the note up Tommy's ass.

See how everyone gets to have fun in the second scenario? The best part is knowing that no teacher ever has ever done anything bad. The end.

[–] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why must you shove things up my ass? Please stop. I am in pain.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a skill issue

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zelet@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

I have no idea what your point was but I’m still laughing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 93 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

[–] El_Dorado@beehaw.org 53 points 1 year 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 32 points 1 year 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 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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

[–] ebits21@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 year ago

Digital Brexit

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 62 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

[–] ares35@kbin.social 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

republicans: "hold my beer"

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 16 points 1 year 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 14 points 1 year ago

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sirico@feddit.uk 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] Treczoks@lemm.ee 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] El_Dorado@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

Well all you can say is bye bye and good luck

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 year ago (2 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 23 points 1 year ago (5 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

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] El_Dorado@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago

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

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago

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

/s

[–] FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So did Signal and others actually leave the UK market or did they fold like a wet paper napkin like we all knew they would?

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

By the looks of it e2ee isn't actually banned, and if e.g. Signal says "we can't technically scan people's messages" then they're given a pass... maybe. The Reuters article reads like the UK gvmt are going to be going after more Facebook-like media first, rather than encrypted private messages.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ebits21@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago

Uh it’s not impossible, just illegal.

[–] library_napper@monyet.cc 16 points 1 year ago

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

[–] NegativeLookBehind@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)
[–] KSPAtlas@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 13 points 1 year ago (2 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

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year 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.

[–] owf@feddit.de 6 points 1 year 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago
[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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".

Big if true.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lolors17@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 1 year 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!

[–] ninjakitty7@kbin.social 7 points 1 year 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 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, don't move to Slough

This is general life advice too

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