Curious what this means for other end-to-end encrypted services such as iMessage.
I'm equally curious what this means for Signal and any other open-source encrypted services. In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. This technique is used for robotics software that could be dual-purposed for weapons guidance.
Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
21–30 of 591 posts
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#22Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm equally curious what this means for Signal and any other open-source encrypted services. In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. This technique is used for robotics software that could be dual-purposed for weapons guidance.
The EAR does not cover publically availible source code but specifically exempts it.
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#24The title is editorialized - it's not just Whatsapp, it's all social media platforms.
(The headline on Bloomberg, "Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K. Police" is more restrained.)
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#25Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#26> Social media platforms based in the U.S. including Facebook and WhatsApp will be forced to share users’ encrypted messages with British police under a new treaty between the two countries, according to a person familiar with the matter. This sounds as if the platforms are already sharing with the US authorities. So this being about them sharing it now with UK authorities.
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#27>Priti Patel, the U.K.’s home secretary, has previously warned that Facebook’s plan to enable users to send end-to-end encrypted messages would benefit criminals...
In London alone, it is not possible to pay for public transport with cash. A debit card/oyster is required but for anonymous travel, an oyster can be topped up via cash and reduces transport surveillance, unlike using credit / debit cards. Their reasons for doing this because it "benefits criminals" is echoing the "ban encryption" nonsense.
> The U.K. and the U.S. have agreed not to investigate each other’s citizens as part of the deal...
This I don't believe.
EDIT: Use a oyster card for public anonymous transport, refrain from using a credit / debit card for this.
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#28Curious what this means for other end-to-end encrypted services such as iMessage.
I'm equally curious what this means for Signal and any other open-source encrypted services. In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. This technique is used for robotics software that could be dual-purposed for weapons guidance.
That said, freedom can also be in our own minds, creating a good life in an ocean of political corruption and increasing control of corporations/elites. It would take more effort, but I think I could also have a good life in Gibson’s sci-fi worlds.
Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#29Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?
#30> Social media platforms based in the U.S. including Facebook and WhatsApp will be forced to share users’ encrypted messages with British police under a new treaty between the two countries, according to a person familiar with the matter. This sounds as if the platforms are already sharing with the US authorities. So this being about them sharing it now with UK authorities.
I wonder what happens with Signal as it's US-based.