UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
11–20 of 143 posts
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#12A more effective approach would be to highlight how the far-right uses encrypted chat apps. That would get the majority of the media and blue-checks supporting you. > Why right-wing extremists’ favorite new platform is so dangerous. Telegram’s lax content moderation and encrypted chats make it a convenient tool for extremists. https://www.vox.com/recode/22238755/telegram-messaging-socia... > In collaboration with ant…
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#13Any insights as to why the big players are implementing E2E while ignoring P2P? Is this a control issue or purely related to technical challenges?
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#14Any insights as to why the big players are implementing E2E while ignoring P2P? Is this a control issue or purely related to technical challenges?
One big problem with P2P is that it reveals the IP address of the other party.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#15End to end encryption will surely make a government's task of protecting the public much harder. It allows paedos, terrorists and the like to communicate freely, and any efforts to track what they're up to must be an absolute nightmare. The problem is, getting rid of encryption is replacing a bad situation with a disastrous situation. If you ban locks so the government can obtain access to the house of a terrorist, i…
Are you serious? This isn't high on their agenda at all.
> surely there's tech people whose job is to explain this to politicians
You have a very, very optimistic view of the world. If the government needs to get a consultant, they'll just find one who agrees with them.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#16This is just exasperating. Pro privacy? You’re responsible for child abuse. Every time you think the current British government can’t sink any lower…
Just ask Prince Andrew.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#17A more effective approach would be to highlight how the far-right uses encrypted chat apps. That would get the majority of the media and blue-checks supporting you. > Why right-wing extremists’ favorite new platform is so dangerous. Telegram’s lax content moderation and encrypted chats make it a convenient tool for extremists. https://www.vox.com/recode/22238755/telegram-messaging-socia... > In collaboration with ant…
I hear some ultra-right-wing people might be typing their nonsense with their hands. So we should make sure no one has hands, that'll get em.
~ Also, this list of US news vendors' articles against e2ee is kinda evidence that it's not just the UK going on a campaign.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#18Any insights as to why the big players are implementing E2E while ignoring P2P? Is this a control issue or purely related to technical challenges?
Both. Certainly a lot of major players see messaging as an important strategic area, not much needs to be said about that. But remember, for actual secure communications one needs both encryption and authentication, and the latter is a much more challenging problem. Purely as a matter of tech there could be better ways to go about that, but in practice there isn't any great infra for that inter-system, which is both distributed or at least federated and easy/accessible for the overwhelming majority of the population. It's improving in fits and starts but still a mess. A lot of the natural places that might make sense to base authentication off of have insecure foundations with enormous legacy base that'd be hard to change (typical collective action problem), or are very slow moving for other reasons.
Centralized solutions just make authentication much easier, even if at obvious cost and SPOF-risk. Within any given platform the centralized provider can of course guarantee all participants about certain properties of whomever they're dealing with. Governments could perhaps require some sort of industry standardized public-key based interoperability of auth, but even assuming they didn't muck it up goverments themselves (as this article shows) have unfortunate perverse incentives there. Not many have internalized yet that the economic cost of poor authentication and security is very high because it's so distributed. There may be a bit of coming around on that but it's slow. A grim silver lining to all the ransomware attacks for example is that at least they're highly visible and painful, and at last have started to motivate minds a bit. But the addiction of many agencies to old models is strong.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
One big problem with P2P is that it reveals the IP address of the other party.
That's true but aren't the feds already able to request that as metadata?
OTOH, many email providers do include the sender's IP, so it doesn't seem like a deal-breaker.
Re: UK government plans publicity blitz against encrypted communications
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
One big problem with P2P is that it reveals the IP address of the other party.
That's true but aren't the feds already able to request that as metadata?