| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 16:52 - Mar 27 with 1197 views | BOjK |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 16:48 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Apples and chocolate oranges |
You are right. A better analogy would be if the CCTV was only made available to blackmailers, blaggers and fraudsters who would also be given a copy of your front-door key. |  |
|  |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:02 - Mar 27 with 1177 views | BlueLikeJazz |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 16:48 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Apples and chocolate oranges |
Really?
"I'm prepared to give up privacy for the sake of mine and my family's safety."
Either you think people have a right to privacy or they don't. |  | | |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:30 - Mar 27 with 1142 views | ClausThomsen |
 | | | |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:32 - Mar 27 with 1136 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:02 - Mar 27 by BlueLikeJazz |
Really?
"I'm prepared to give up privacy for the sake of mine and my family's safety."
Either you think people have a right to privacy or they don't. |
Are you seriously asking why I think there's a difference between CCTV cameras in every persons bedroom and whether the security services can get access to whatsapp messages rather then them being encrypted? |  |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:41 - Mar 27 with 1104 views | BlueLikeJazz |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 17:32 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Are you seriously asking why I think there's a difference between CCTV cameras in every persons bedroom and whether the security services can get access to whatsapp messages rather then them being encrypted? |
I was being slightly (and possibly inappropriately) flippant, I grant you, but the 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' mob really grind my gears. I'd be interested to know exactly what limits you think *should* be placed on state surveillance, because you don't really sound as if you've thought the implications through for more than about a minute, to be honest. | | | |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 18:18 - Mar 27 with 1063 views | DanTheMan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 16:48 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Apples and chocolate oranges |
Problem is that with encryption, there isn't a "you can view these people but not these people". It doesn't work like that, it's designed specifically not to work like that.
So if it's broken for one person, it is broken for all people. |  |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:05 - Mar 27 with 1030 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 18:18 - Mar 27 by DanTheMan |
Problem is that with encryption, there isn't a "you can view these people but not these people". It doesn't work like that, it's designed specifically not to work like that.
So if it's broken for one person, it is broken for all people. |
Which isn't a problem imo
They aren't gonna care about someone sexting their missus. But they would be able to find out what the nutter from last week said two minutes before killing innocent people | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:10 - Mar 27 with 1024 views | Lord_Lucan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:05 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Which isn't a problem imo
They aren't gonna care about someone sexting their missus. But they would be able to find out what the nutter from last week said two minutes before killing innocent people |
Rommy, let me put your mind at rest.
Despite what he tells you, "The Man" can see everything - whenever he wants. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:10 - Mar 27 with 1024 views | J2BLUE |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 22:34 - Mar 26 by The_Romford_Blue |
I've had a think about it too.
I wrote an essay on it encryption and privacy in school once which involved 2 weeks of research
I believe anyone choosing privacy over safety (not just from terrorists) is absolutely crazy. This attacker could have spent weeks on whatsapp (he was on there 2 minutes before going over the bridge) going through every last stage with someone from ISIS on how to do it. |
I'm crazy and an idiot then.
Perhaps you'd consent to being microchipped so you couldn't be kidnapped? Perhaps wear a little camera which records everything you see and say to avoid being killed?
Where's your red line? |  |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:27 - Mar 27 with 1007 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:10 - Mar 27 by J2BLUE |
I'm crazy and an idiot then.
Perhaps you'd consent to being microchipped so you couldn't be kidnapped? Perhaps wear a little camera which records everything you see and say to avoid being killed?
Where's your red line? |
I don't agree with either of those.
I just think security services should be able to see what people say. Obviously they need to have a genuine reason to such as finding why a terrorist attacker was using whatsapp just before killing those people.
Or what a peadophile was saying seconds before killing a child.
The words shouldnt just be lost | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:28 - Mar 27 with 1006 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:10 - Mar 27 by Lord_Lucan |
Rommy, let me put your mind at rest.
Despite what he tells you, "The Man" can see everything - whenever he wants. |
Not with end to end encryption
That's what I'm led to believe | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:32 - Mar 27 with 1001 views | J2BLUE |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:27 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
I don't agree with either of those.
I just think security services should be able to see what people say. Obviously they need to have a genuine reason to such as finding why a terrorist attacker was using whatsapp just before killing those people.
Or what a peadophile was saying seconds before killing a child.
The words shouldnt just be lost |
Hitler was in power less than 100 years ago.
Just saying. | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:34 - Mar 27 with 1000 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:32 - Mar 27 by J2BLUE |
Hitler was in power less than 100 years ago.
Just saying. |
I don't understand your point | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:38 - Mar 27 with 989 views | J2BLUE |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:34 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
I don't understand your point |
We think we live in a democratic world which can never change. Less than 100 years ago Hitler walked the earth. It's not impossible we will one day see a savoury character become PM or gain significant power. Suddenly the surveillance to 'keep us safe' does anything but. | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:40 - Mar 27 with 986 views | LankHenners |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:27 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
I don't agree with either of those.
I just think security services should be able to see what people say. Obviously they need to have a genuine reason to such as finding why a terrorist attacker was using whatsapp just before killing those people.
Or what a peadophile was saying seconds before killing a child.
The words shouldnt just be lost |
Thing is though, if would-be terrorists or other nasty types knew that security services could see their messages on whatsapp, they'd just communicate another way on another platform.
It seems an overly-simple proposal to a complicated problem put forward by someone who is clearly somewhat technologically illiterate. |  |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:45 - Mar 27 with 975 views | ElderGrizzly |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:05 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Which isn't a problem imo
They aren't gonna care about someone sexting their missus. But they would be able to find out what the nutter from last week said two minutes before killing innocent people |
We/they can see it.
The news is all a lot of bluster over anything like this |  | | |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:50 - Mar 27 with 962 views | ElderGrizzly |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:40 - Mar 27 by LankHenners |
Thing is though, if would-be terrorists or other nasty types knew that security services could see their messages on whatsapp, they'd just communicate another way on another platform.
It seems an overly-simple proposal to a complicated problem put forward by someone who is clearly somewhat technologically illiterate. |
They tend to not overthink it in that way tbh. These apps are much more difficult to get access to data for, but not completely so. That's good enough for most, as not everyone can be watched and it's not a 'trawl' for people. It needs to be targetted.
The companies involved could make it easier for certain groups, but it's not impossible now. If time is critical, then it is a real balls ache.
I'm sure we'll see more of this in the months and years to come, but "The Man" as Lucan puts it, will always find a way | | | |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:50 - Mar 27 with 961 views | Lord_Lucan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:28 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Not with end to end encryption
That's what I'm led to believe |
Oh Rommy
Rommy Rommy Rommy | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:55 - Mar 27 with 946 views | DanTheMan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:50 - Mar 27 by Lord_Lucan |
Oh Rommy
Rommy Rommy Rommy |
No, seriously. I'd be absolutely amazed if they could decrypt messages on mass.
Because if they could, we'd have already seen the attacks in the wild from non-Government agencies, especially black and grey hats. They'd have a field day with it.
Just to be clear, what they can do (and was confirmed recently in the CIA leaks) is install malware to intercept messages before they become encrypted in the first place. They already have this capability, will have done for some time and you'd be a fool to think they couldn't. What Amber Rudd is suggesting is entirely different kettle of fish. [Post edited 27 Mar 2017 20:04]
| |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:59 - Mar 27 with 935 views | DanTheMan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:05 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Which isn't a problem imo
They aren't gonna care about someone sexting their missus. But they would be able to find out what the nutter from last week said two minutes before killing innocent people |
It's not about that. You can't selectively break encryption for Government agencies. Even if we pretend they have only good intentions, if you introduce a back door into encryption it could be exploited by absolutely anyone.
Also many businesses rely on end to end encryption working. Every time you send your bank details online, those messages will be encrypted (unless it's a very dodgy site). If they weren't, someone who wanted those details could just intercept the message and take your credit card details. | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:06 - Mar 27 with 908 views | Lord_Lucan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 19:55 - Mar 27 by DanTheMan |
No, seriously. I'd be absolutely amazed if they could decrypt messages on mass.
Because if they could, we'd have already seen the attacks in the wild from non-Government agencies, especially black and grey hats. They'd have a field day with it.
Just to be clear, what they can do (and was confirmed recently in the CIA leaks) is install malware to intercept messages before they become encrypted in the first place. They already have this capability, will have done for some time and you'd be a fool to think they couldn't. What Amber Rudd is suggesting is entirely different kettle of fish. [Post edited 27 Mar 2017 20:04]
|
I think I'll take more notice of our FO member
No offence | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:09 - Mar 27 with 897 views | DanTheMan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:06 - Mar 27 by Lord_Lucan |
I think I'll take more notice of our FO member
No offence |
FO?
And none taken either way. | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:10 - Mar 27 with 882 views | Lord_Lucan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:09 - Mar 27 by DanTheMan |
FO?
And none taken either way. |
Elder Grizzly - Foreign Office | |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:13 - Mar 27 with 871 views | DanTheMan |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 20:10 - Mar 27 by Lord_Lucan |
Elder Grizzly - Foreign Office |
Ah, didn't know that was where they worked.
If you're genuinely interested, I'd check out the CIA leaks.
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/
Actually what Elder doesn't actually contradict what I said - there is no mass surveillance, but targeted it possible with tools. But I've seen no evidence from the netsec community that Signal has been broken. [Post edited 27 Mar 2017 20:14]
| |
| |
| I didn't realise end-to-end encryption included intelligence services on 23:49 - Mar 27 with 810 views | Blue_Order |
I just don't believe that anybody's security is being any more compromised by the existence of one form of private communication than another. If Whatsapp is brought under government scrutiny, terrorists will use Tor. Tor is already under government scrutiny, the US government funded it, and it has proved incredibly difficult for them to decrypt it. If not Tor, then it'll be something else. If the government passes a law requiring commercial messaging services to build a backdoor in their encryption, that law will be public knowledge and the terrorists will just use other methods. Then where will the legislating stop?
Laws are supposed to be passed in response to need. The government keeps saying that it has foiled 13 terror plots in the whatsapp age, so they didn't need this law then. Then our luck ran out when a guy ploughed a hard, heavy object into some soft, light people. No encrypted services needed to carry out that operation. So what need are we responding to here? Which threats are threatening us because of privacy and would be thwarted by relinquishing a bit of it? |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
