Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 409 posts

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#11

Post by Xarodon »

immibis wrote: post #8
motohagiography wrote: post #7

Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further redu…

I wasn't aware the Russian army was recruiting from the UK?

Are we just being obtuse now? Is that what we're doing?

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#12

Post by throw0101a »

motohagiography wrote: post #7

Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further redu…

> Her television interview […]

Channel 4 News segment:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E--bVV_eQR0

The MP, Damian Collins, "who formerly served as a junior Minister for Tech and the Digital Economy in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport":

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damian_Collins

Reminder:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#13

Post by Xarodon »

andy_ppp wrote: post #10

Who persuades politicians it’s a good idea for the security services to be able to scan all their messages? I am absolutely certain that the politicians have absolutely no clue what they’re being asked to implement.

Whoever has money and/or political capital and a desire to see encryption weakened.

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#14

Post by Canada »

ben_w wrote: post #6
semiquaver wrote: post #4

Governments seem to want to have it both ways. As new technologies are introduced they assume that capabilities and practices available to analogous predecessors must remain available to them (e.g. wire-tapping phones => undermining cryptography) but they don’t feel the same way about public benefits or rights associated with other technology that is being replaced (anonymous cash transactions => ???) It also seems l…

> I assume the UK had some equivalent to the 90s crypto wars in the US where attempts to weaken and backdoor crypto by legal means were pretty decisively defeated. I'm thinking of the fact that GCHQ invented RSA in 1973, four years before Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman publicly described the same system, and only got around to declassifying this in 1997.

Did it really invent RSA, such that there was any actual capability of performing asymmetric encryption or signatures?

I thought it was more like, one guy there had a pretty good idea that it was possible that he wrote about, but never developed it into anything practical.

Am I mistaken, and the whole working system was described?

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#15

Post by ciwolsey »

Xarodon wrote: post #11
immibis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware the Russian army was recruiting from the UK?

Are we just being obtuse now? Is that what we're doing?

I think he's genuinely confused, and as a citizen of the UK, so am I..

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#16

Post by throw0101a »

ben_w wrote: post #6
semiquaver wrote: post #4

Governments seem to want to have it both ways. As new technologies are introduced they assume that capabilities and practices available to analogous predecessors must remain available to them (e.g. wire-tapping phones => undermining cryptography) but they don’t feel the same way about public benefits or rights associated with other technology that is being replaced (anonymous cash transactions => ???) It also seems l…

> I assume the UK had some equivalent to the 90s crypto wars in the US where attempts to weaken and backdoor crypto by legal means were pretty decisively defeated. I'm thinking of the fact that GCHQ invented RSA in 1973, four years before Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman publicly described the same system, and only got around to declassifying this in 1997.

For the record, GCHQ created RSA in 1973 and then DH in 1974:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-key_cryptography#Histor...

DH qua DH was invented in 1976, and RSA qua RSA in 1977.

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#17

Post by throw0101a »

Canada wrote: post #14
ben_w wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I assume the UK had some equivalent to the 90s crypto wars in the US where attempts to weaken and backdoor crypto by legal means were pretty decisively defeated. I'm thinking of the fact that GCHQ invented RSA in 1973, four years before Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman publicly described the same system, and only got around to declassifying this in 1997.

Did it really invent RSA, such that there was any actual capability of performing asymmetric encryption or signatures? I thought it was more like, one guy there had a pretty good idea that it was possible that he wrote about, but never developed it into anything practical. Am I mistaken, and the whole working system was described?

A PDF scan of the paper is now available, so you can judge for yourself:

* https://web.archive.org/web/20180928121748/https://www.gchq....

IANAM (mathematician), but the formulae look RSA-like, though given the compute at the time, it may have been (too) expensive to try implementing.

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#19

Post by crossroadsguy »

motohagiography wrote: post #7

Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further redu…

[flagged]

Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law

#20

Post by flerovium »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #19
motohagiography wrote: post #7

Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further redu…

[flagged]

The British government has been oppressing the people of the British isles long before and after the empire...
Post reply on HN