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

UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

private-eye.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 123 posts

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#21

Post by heavenlyblue »

dan-robertson wrote: post #17

I’m in two minds about this. I think it’s pretty sleazy to be using signal to evade record keeping requirements. I also think it’s important to have transparency into things governments do. But I also worry that such requirements can lead to worse results. Generally in a well run organisation, you want people to be able to speak their mind and disagree about things, but if the organisation makes a bad decision and th…

The issue is that UK politicians have themselves decided to evade rather than going through the legal, public process of allowing this to happen.

Even if you agree that some privacy in communications must be preserved, they didn’t do that through a process a part of which they themselves are.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#22

Post by miki123211 »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #12
afandian wrote: post #2

For those unfamiliar, Private Eve is an excellent magazine with a long history. It takes a humourous but serious investgative look at UK politics, business etc looking at eg corruption and double standards. With cartoons and iconic front page puns. And for the large part it avoided the pitfalls of moving online. Current issue: https://www.private-eye.co.uk/current-issue

Private Eye avoided the paywall problem by not putting itself online at all, it only publishes selected articles online to leave you hungry for the rest :)

It also avoided becoming accessible to the blind and other parts of the population who cannot read print.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#23

Post by cheschire »

I had a buddy a couple years ago who was a low level FOIA officer in the U.S. military. He was telling me that shortly after the Clinton email scandal there was a policy pushed on all his branch's computers that forced encryption to be turned on for all users.

What that resulted in was basically a complete shutdown of email discovery for fulfilling FOIA requests. You go into Outlook, do a search, and if it's not in the subject line of the email then it's simply not found.

He told the story as if it was a conspiracy against FOIA, but based on my experience of dealing with bureaucracies, it was more likely just coincidence.

Never attribute to malice what could be explained with incompetence.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#24

Post by tarkin2 »

I can’t help but laugh a sad laugh. I oppose government monitoring and support transparency. And I support Signal to avoid monitoring and now it’s used to remove transparency.

I can’t get my friends to install Signal because they say they have nothing to hide from their government and now the same government is using Signal to hide from my friends.

Moxie should add it to the advertising blurb:” We’re so secure the British government use Signal to hide from its citizens.”

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#25

Post by mabbo »

noir_lord wrote: post #16
afandian wrote: post #2

For those unfamiliar, Private Eve is an excellent magazine with a long history. It takes a humourous but serious investgative look at UK politics, business etc looking at eg corruption and double standards. With cartoons and iconic front page puns. And for the large part it avoided the pitfalls of moving online. Current issue: https://www.private-eye.co.uk/current-issue

So good in fact that the managing editor is usually the most sued person in the UK. Ian Hislop is a national treasure and his evidence to the select committee on press intrusion was both erudite and hilarious.

His TV panel show, "Have I Got News For You" is also wonderful. Just comedians, discussing and making jokes about the news, for something like 25 years now. And most of it is on YouTube.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#26

Post by nabla9 »

dmurray wrote: post #11
nabla9 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media used does does not affect the privacy/non-privacy of the discussion in any way.

But it does. There's no expectation on politicians to record and publish their face-to-face one-on-one conversations.

Can I gently bring the discussion back to the point. Usually argument defence in the internet seems to diverge.

The issue: Using Signal to to evade Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Government officials are legally required to keep records of decision making and discussions made in official capacity. If they use discussions over Signal to make decisions, they should write memos and archive them. Just because the media they use is not doing it for the does not relieve them from the duty.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#27

Post by dazzawazza »

afandian wrote: post #2

For those unfamiliar, Private Eve is an excellent magazine with a long history. It takes a humourous but serious investgative look at UK politics, business etc looking at eg corruption and double standards. With cartoons and iconic front page puns. And for the large part it avoided the pitfalls of moving online. Current issue: https://www.private-eye.co.uk/current-issue

It has consistently had (IMHO) the best pandemic coverage of any media. The MD section is brilliant, challenging and thought provoking... and it's a satirical magazine!

(this says a lot about the poor state of media in general).

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#28

Post by [deleted] »

fit2rule wrote: post #15
laumars wrote: post #9

It’s “funny” how the U.K. government endorse signal for covering their tracks but want backdoors put in because other people can’t be trusted. Furthermore, it should be illegal for governments to use self-destructing messages.

Government secrecy should be absolutely restricted by the general public - it is the beginning of all corruption of government. The UK headed down the wrong path towards totalitarian class-ist society when it decided the common people shouldn't know their own governments' secrets.

[deleted]

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#29

Post by billme »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #8
billme wrote: post #3

For those not following the topic, among others, the UK, EU, US - all officially endorsed the use of Signal for official government use.

Do you have a link for that? I often get ask questions about secure messaging, and I always have a hard time giving anything better than "it depends".

——————————

UK example reference: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/12/20/uk_conservatives_br...

——————————

EU example reference: https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/24/21150918/european-commiss...

——————————

US example drafted by NSA: https://media.defense.gov/2020/Apr/24/2002288652/-1/-1/0/CSI...

* Note this document is for public release. If you dig around you will find references to deploy US Special Forces even using Signal for official communications within combat zones.

——————————

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#30

Post by tomhoward »

Some points to consider:

- From the article: “Starting in late 2004, before the FOIA came into force in early 2005, Downing Street implemented an automatic 90-day deletion of emails aside from those specifically selected by civil servants as relevant for storage in the National Archives”

- Since the invention of the telephone, it's never been an expectation that transcripts of telephone calls between MPs or officials should be recorded and made available under FOI.

- Indeed, it's never been an expectation that private face-to-face conversations between MPs/officials be recorded and made available under FOI.

- At least according to FOI laws I'm vaguely familiar with (in Australia), an FOI request can only be made for an item of information that is known to exist. People can't go on "fishing expeditions" for, say, all communications between nominated people over a nominated period of time. Thus, if UK FOI is similarly constrained, it's usually going to be unlikely a private messaging app conversation could be sought under FOI anyway.

All that considered, I don't think this is that big a deal.

Post reply on HN