It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cameron wants to ban encryption – he can say goodbye to digital Britain

page: 2
24
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: AgentSmith
a reply to: and14263

You can tell that there hasn't been a lot of genetically diverse material available in the creation of those people. The guy from Wallace and Gromit always looks especially peculiar.

Brilliant. I can personally see some Simpson's characteristics in Farage.

edit on 16-1-2015 by and14263 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263

Oh yeah, LOL!

Link to image
edit on 16-1-2015 by AgentSmith because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I don't think it would be deemed legal, as banks and businesses use it and its a necessity for the economy.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: lifttheveil
Of course he does,the loon just did a speech whereby he likened all conspiracy theorists to ISIS,talk about being paranoid and that's an irony in itself.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Basically Cameron is saying...

If have a warrant to search your house, I can read letters and that written narrative will become part of the evidence base, etc. I can also legally listen into your telephone with the right warrant (signed by the Home Secretary). I also know that you made call from A to B because that trace evidence is readily available. Google probably record more than all governments combined!

Cameron contests that with a warrant the security services should be able to read the content of you online activity, currently not covered by law. This content is presumably hidden behind encryption.

There was nothing about encryption per se, but the implication is there that the authorities should be able legally crack encryption, so such content can be revealed (like the letter) and brought into the legal framework.

I know that people get justifiably concerned with this type of thing, and I share those concerns, but with right level of legal oversight, what's the problem? As my personal activities online and offline won't attract the attention of the security services I'm fine. I am quite comfortable, with appropriate legal assurance, for the security services to be reading every line from some sick nut-job to another, when they are planning some lunacy. Even the threat of such intervention may impair the organisation of atrocities.

Regards



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   
"Do as I say not as I do."

What a jerk. Sure, let's ban encrypting for governments, banks and corporations just to see how well things go!

Oh, he meant only noooormal people ahhhh.
Psychopaths that run our system are not subject to laws.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Problem is though, as soon as you have a backdoor no matter how well you guard it at some point someone's going to slip by.
The whole thing with point to point encryption means as long as there is no man in the middle attack (which would normally require someone to accept a suspicious prompt warning them something's up), you can be pretty sure that your data is secure. Any way built in for 'legitimate' interception is potentially a way in for illegitimate interception.

How is it going to work anyway? Anyone organised and up to no good in any serious way can use encrypted peer to peer comms which have no central server handing traffic, or hide messages within the actual data composing benign files like images.

It's just delusions of grandeur and making wide sweeping claims and statements to make the quivering public think the good 'ole Government are going to protect them. A script kiddy could find ways around all of their crap. OK, so what if you use GPGMail suite or something like it? You can even paste your encrypted comms into Facebook messages if you so desire! They can scream and cry at Facebook all they want but at best they'll get your encrypted message as received by Facebook.

I suggest all you good people check out things like GPGTools (for Mac) and it's clients for other operating systems.

GPG Tools

Can I use GPGTools to communicate with people on Linux / Windows?

I'd start reading here on Wiki en.wikipedia.org... and looking into some of the things like Bitmessage (I haven't yet so can't really recommend anything or have an opinion).

Maybe they'll go down the route of making it illegal to possess or use encryption tools like the above, which I believe some countries have. Sickening.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   


Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.


Benjamin Franklin



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
I know that people get justifiably concerned with this type of thing, and I share those concerns, but with right level of legal oversight, what's the problem? As my personal activities online and offline won't attract the attention of the security services I'm fine. I am quite comfortable, with appropriate legal assurance, for the security services to be reading every line from some sick nut-job to another, when they are planning some lunacy. Even the threat of such intervention may impair the organisation of atrocities.


Also... Do you really think you can trust these people? Even I don't..

The corruption of Britain: UK’s key institutions infiltrated by criminals



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   
BoingBoing's writeup is actually pretty good, and right when you look at it logically.


This, then, is what David Cameron is proposing:

* All Britons' communications must be easy for criminals, voyeurs and foreign spies to intercept

* Any firms within reach of the UK government must be banned from producing secure software

* All major code repositories, such as Github and Sourceforge, must be blocked

* Search engines must not answer queries about web-pages that carry secure software

* Virtually all academic security work in the UK must cease -- security research must only take place in proprietary research environments where there is no onus to publish one's findings, such as industry R&D and the security services

* All packets in and out of the country, and within the country, must be subject to Chinese-style deep-packet inspection and any packets that appear to originate from secure software must be dropped

* Existing walled gardens (like Ios and games consoles) must be ordered to ban their users from installing secure software

* Anyone visiting the country from abroad must have their smartphones held at the border until they leave

* Proprietary operating system vendors (Microsoft and Apple) must be ordered to redesign their operating systems as walled gardens that only allow users to run software from an app store, which will not sell or give secure software to Britons

* Free/open source operating systems -- that power the energy, banking, ecommerce, and infrastructure sectors -- must be banned outright


boingboing.net...

Really all I can think is that they've completely lost the plot and think it's April the 1st already, they actually are planning to make the UK into a bigger ****hole than the countries they are trying to protect themselves from, or they're just making big sweeping gestures to try and impress the average idiot voter.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason


Typical hyperbolic nonsense from the Guardian and many in this thread...

He was speaking rhetorically - the Guardian even mentions that with a lot of "if's, but's and maybe's" thrown in order to add meat to the bones of what the PM said. He will be told that this simply isn't workable and even if any Bill get's put before parliament, it will be torn to shreds in the Committee's for the very reasons in the OP article.

Your nonsense not withstanding… tune into CNN. Your PM and ours are about to give a press conference announcing new 'security measures'. The excuse will be the overblown terr incident in France.

Part of the "encryption" problem as the government sees it is all the extra encryption added by private firms after Edward Snowden's revelations abut government snooping on private internet information. They want that back and they are going to talk about adding "backdoors" to overcome it.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Trueman
It's time for UK ATS fellas to develop a secret language.


I recommend looking at the Unicode character set for inspiration. This is an attempt to put every symbol or glyph of every human language into a single specification:

unicode.org...

Vai is my favorite:

unicode.org...



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I have said before and il say it again:

# camron # therssa may and # the torys,

Il fight them to the end on this!

Il sooner go to jail than give up my privacy and pc security.


# them to the depths of hell.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   
The beauty of code is that it can't be censored once it has been released as an open source project. Even more than that, you can't censor well established mathematical concepts, and to think you can is the pinnacle of ignorance. I have even written my own encryption algorithm which I know with 100% certainty could not be cracked. The thing a lot of people don't realize about encryption is that it's nothing like what you see in the movies, there are ways to encrypt files so that it's virtually impossible to decrypt them. For example look at the wikileaks insurance files, they still haven't been cracked after many years. This is why people like Cameron hate such strong encryption, they want to be able to see everything.
edit on 16/1/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: lifttheveil

This idiot needs to be locked up for life.

He cant ban anything....we will still use it and nothing can be done!!

Defy the government at all cost!



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Am sure also, like the US, they support stuff that they do not read nor know anything about but rally around for agenda.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 12:01 AM
link   
The only thing that will come out of implementing a policy such as this will be:

  1. Criminals who want to be descriptive will still use encryption (like a group trying to communicate to do a terrorist action or rob a bank are going to say “but wait, we can't use encryption because of that policy”, what fantasy land are they living in?
  2. Normal, law abiding citizen's private information and business will be more vulnerable, just look what happened when the smallest hole opened in Apple's cloud and many actresses personal photos where hacked.
  3. Politicians and other people in the government will still employee the use of encryption. The rest of us are just dumb cows to them.


edit on 17-1-2015 by RazielBlaze because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: stumason

Typical response from anyone who would have that kind of propaganda as an avatar!


Pathetic - that's all you can do, go after my avatar?



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

It's not just the Tories, Crazy - Labour tried several times to bring in draconian legislation with regards to digital communications and in many cases, succeeded. This has nothing to do with Party politics and is merely the politicians repeating what their advisor' and/or the security services are telling them - which of course will remain the same no matter who is occupying number 10.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 04:10 AM
link   
I dont crae.

They are the ones proposing it now,

That makes them the current enemy of freedom.




top topics



 
24
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join