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

UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 234 posts

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#151

Post by pjc50 »

Veen wrote: post #124
schmuelio wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would be more apt to call it plenty of "evidence"...

Yes, but it's an argument that just goes round and round forever. Conservatives think the BBC is run by a left-wing cabal. Leftists think it's an establishment mouthpiece run by the Tories. We've been having exactly the same argument since the 1960s.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/378/digital-cultu...

The chair is a Tory. We can then quibble over "run by", but you can't ignore the significant connections at high level.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#152

Post by philipwhiuk »

dspillett wrote: post #31

A paraphrase of the age-old glib phrase is in order: If you outlaw End-to-End Encryption, only criminals will have End-to-End Encryption. It should also be pointed out to them that saying “you there, yes you, stop doing that” to remote, likely anonymous, criminal types, has never been effective.

I guess it's easier to arrest people for encrypting stuff than proving they are dealing drugs.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#153

Post by Veen »

pjc50 wrote: post #151
Veen wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but it's an argument that just goes round and round forever. Conservatives think the BBC is run by a left-wing cabal. Leftists think it's an establishment mouthpiece run by the Tories. We've been having exactly the same argument since the 1960s.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/378/digital-cultu... The chair is a Tory. We can then quibble over "run by", but you can't ignore the significant connections at high level.

The Chair, DG, and other higher-ups will almost always have either Labour or Tory connections, because those are the two main political parties. You'd be hard pushed to find a suitable candidate that wasn't connected at a high level. I suppose the tell is whether people who are up in arms about Tory Richard Sharp were similarly upset when Labour-supporting Michael Lyons or Gavyn Davies were chairman, or when Labour-supporting Mark Thompson, etc were DG.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#154

Post by danw1979 »

This will not happen. If the government (or Ofcom if the bill goes through) is seen by the populace to be the cause of WhatsApp being withdrawn from British users the outrage will be deafening.

No administration would do such a thing, even the incompetents in office at the moment. (quite possible is a terrible PR own goal followed by a u-turn, however)

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#155

Post by antibasilisk »

deathcakes wrote: post #149
monocasa wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The king has veto power over any acts he believes affects him, and him and the queen have apparently used the threat of this many times in order to shape UK legislation before it's argued on. Apparently almost all legislation is passed by the royal family's office for edits before it goes up for debate. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette... This idea that the royal family has no meaningful p…

Yes and when was the last time a reigning monarch exercised those powers? The answer is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Militia_Bill

If you'd have read the article you would see that it has been used numerous times over the last couple of decades.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#156

Post by josefx »

dannyw wrote: post #59
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #35

So, what's going to happen with secure banking? Will local govt officials (councillors) get to spy on all my credit card transactions and sneak a peak at my account passwords and PINs? This will basically make e-commerce a risky business. If I buy something from overseas, will I then get in trouble for setting up an end-to-end encrypted link with their shop or is it more likely that international sites will just stop…

All credit card transactions and financial transactions are basically open book.

And how do you sign the transactions to confirm that they where send by someone authorized?

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#157

Post by pjc50 »

ly3xqhl8g9 wrote: post #87
gadders wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of non-Brits hear "House of Lords" and think you have to have been born in a castle with a coat of arms. Whilst that may be true in the case of the hereditary peers (which are the minority in the HoL), there are also Life Peers. Some of these are ex/failed politicians, but some are appointed on the basis of their eminence in their field [1] or public works [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Wi…

I know, I just like long hereditary lines [1]: if those don't show what power is, then I don't know what power is. Being hoi polloi myself, I barely know who my grandparents were, not to speak of their parents. [1] A really fun one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_of_Dunsany#Barons_of_Dun... Christopher Plunkett, 1st Baron of Dunsany (1410–1463) Richard Plunkett, 2nd Baron of Dunsany (died c. 1480) John Plunkett,…

Real power doesn't quite follow like that. I'm reminded of how Eastenders actor Danny Dyer found he was a descendant of King Edward III.

Real power flows through those who've maintained their assets, e.g. Duke of Devonshire; those who own the media, e.g. Viscount Rothermere; and just buying your way in, like Baron Lebedev, son of former KGB oligarch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Lebedev

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#158

Post by antibasilisk »

tialaramex wrote: post #119
gadders wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, I googled the last chap in the list [1]. Class/socio-economic privilege is very much a thing, but he's not quite the Jacob Rees-Mogg type you might expect. Also "The current heir to his title is his younger brother, Oliver, a games designer and programmer who lives in the US." - he probably has a login on here :-) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randal_Plunkett,_21st_Baron_of...

And to the point, Rees-Mogg was elected. Misguided they might be, but a majority of those who voted in his constituency (yup, not just a plurality, a majority) picked Rees-Mogg. For better or worse that's democracy for you.

People just vote for him because he sounds funny, because the only thing the parliament is useful for is its entertainment value.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#159

Post by pjc50 »

ly3xqhl8g9 wrote: post #76
jabradoodle wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you've pointed out some of the ways in which the UK is not democratic, and many would like that to change. Democracy is not a 0 or 1 thing, it is a scale. There is statistically a good chance you are from the US, which has no concept of Lords, but which has its own very serious shortcomings.

Very much not from US. Just pointed out a hypocrisy of our language. As an aside, US has lords as well, perhaps even more powerful than UK lords, they just go by other names: Supreme Court judges, some Senators [1], some CEOs, and the like. [1] Just the top: Robert C. Byrd (D-WV), almost 51.5 years mandate, most kings couldn't even dream of such a lengthy reign, https://www.senate.gov/senators/longest_serving_senator…

I don't know why this of all your comments is downvoted. The US Supreme Court is quite strongly analogous to life peers, in that they get to make legislative and even super-legislative decisions while being lifetime political appointees. And, it appears, accepting gifts.

Re: UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

#160

Post by monocasa »

deathcakes wrote: post #149
monocasa wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The king has veto power over any acts he believes affects him, and him and the queen have apparently used the threat of this many times in order to shape UK legislation before it's argued on. Apparently almost all legislation is passed by the royal family's office for edits before it goes up for debate. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette... This idea that the royal family has no meaningful p…

Yes and when was the last time a reigning monarch exercised those powers? The answer is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Militia_Bill

If you read the article, they practically exercise those rights up through the current day. The PM's office runs nearly all proposed legislation by them and makes changes to acts before they go up for debate. Acts have changed from threats of using the royal consent at least as recently as 2021, but it's hard to get complete numbers as most of this process happens in secret.

This is all outlined in the previous citation I gave.

Post reply on HN