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

UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 320 posts

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#81

Post by gridspy »

amiga-workbench wrote: post #64
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't true, is it? If so that's slightly terrifying.

It's not completely untrue, there was a whole hoo-hah over getting Boris Johnsons WhatsApp messages. They use it to get around the requirement that official communications be logged and available for later scrutiny, much like a bank has to retain communications in case of an audit.

Assuming that is true, it's amusing that the politicians are trying to strip communications privacy from the masses while desiring it themselves.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#82

Post by ianburrell »

InitialLastName wrote: post #35
ianburrell wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One-time pad isn't a password. It is a flash drive or hard drive full of random bits.

The difference between those is just one of scale and storage. You still have to reliably move a chunk of out-of-band information in a way such that it gets to (and only gets to) the person you want to have it.

The difference between one-time pad and stream cipher is provable, absolute secrecy, and really good secrecy. If don't care about that, there is zero point to one-time pad.

Also, it isn't just a "chunk", for one-time pad it has to be the same length as the messages. Which is fine if just short messages but a lot harder if lots of data.

If can exchange lots of data, better off using them as keys for stream cipher.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#83

Post by b59831 »

makingstuffs wrote: post #75
ajb wrote: post #5

It's a little unclear, but my reading of this is that the power to do it will still be in the law, requiring at most secondary legislation to put into effect (perhaps not even that) if they think they ever have enough leverage over messaging providers, or are willing to spend the political capital. Not a great place to be in really, but better than it actually being deployed.

I’d bet my life we start to see a massive influx of bad press aimed at messaging providers, focusing on how criminals are using their services, over the next few years. When the general sentiment of the average Dave is ‘encryption === bad’ this BS will rear its head again. Seems to have been the standard play for governments of this country for decades now.

[dead]

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#84

Post by giobox »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #54
ascorbic wrote: post #53

The whole UK government is run via WhatsApp. The threat to withdraw service should have concentrated minds.

This isn't true, is it? If so that's slightly terrifying.

I think its increasingly true of several countries, not just the UK. Any State with strong Freedom of Information legislation not surprisingly creates incentives for certain political operatives to want to avoid exposure by use of unofficial channels further out of reach of FoI - private WhatsApp groups etc etc. I don't see this as any different than the instances of private email service mischief that has occurred in a lot of States too over the last decade (avoiding use of official email accounts for contentious discussions).

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#85

Post by codeptualize »

You see this time and time again, some initiative to "just introduce some backdoors, what could go wrong", and then it takes some time for people who understand what it actually means to convince them that it is in fact a really bad idea and it would be a giant disaster.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#86

Post by generationP »

ChrisKnott wrote: post #76
thereddaikon wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People might be more receptive if the UK government had shown any real intention of going after pedos before this. But the number of scandals and coverups indicate they dont. And this is little more than an excuse to make it easier to spy on their subjects.

[flagged]

The UK has a recent history of sweeping child abuse under the rug when it involves minorities or famous personalities. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit... or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scan... for two examples.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#88

Post by b800h »

dmje wrote: post #45
b800h wrote: post #40

That bit isn't as bad as the part that says you can't run an interactive service without age verification though....

This is the bit that is scaring me, as someone who manages website for clients..

It blows a hole in all sorts of internet activities. We're going to have to rework a lot from scratch when it goes through.

And of course the big internet companies won't complain about it because it gives them legislative capture of the web.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#89

Post by Hermitian909 »

Jigsy wrote: post #52
nonrandomstring wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Through most of history government always has the power, but the question is whether it has the legitimacy. In this case it has the legitimacy, but lacks the power. This is an unusual turn. We need online safety for kids. The aims of this bill should obtain widespread support from everyone. But instead of carefully researching and implementing difficult ideas, framing it properly and obtaining permission from the peo…

Online safety for kids begins at home. The problem is most parents are just too lazy.

This is just as lazy a take as the UK government though.

Many societal problems would be trivial if you could get perfect compliance from the population. You can't, so if you're interested in solving problems you need to be willing to grapple with the world as it is. So far as I can tell online safety has not meaningfully improved since the late 90s - "enforce safety at home" has been the advice for all of that time and it has never worked.

I don't have a solution but "blame the parents" seems to be a very clear non-answer without some plan for how to make creating safety at home more easily actionable.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#90

Post by brobinson »

mfDjB wrote: post #87

I wonder where does this end? I do feel like nearly once a year some country in western world tries to ban encryption. Can we just make it a right to encrypt communications and be done with this endless debate?

Yup, see you guys in the thread next year.
Post reply on HN