Banning All Encryption..... The British Solution

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by driekus, Jan 13, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. driekus

    driekus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Posts:
    489
  2. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    "Obama unveils cybersecurity proposals...

    Barack Obama unveiled new cybersecurity measures on Tuesday amid warnings from privacy campaigners about unnecessarily “broad legal immunity” that could put personal information at risk in the wake of attacks like the Sony Pictures hack

    A White House statement released in advance of the speech said it “encourages the private sector to share appropriate cyber threat information with the Department of Homeland Security’s National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center”

    This agency will in turn share real-time information on hacking with other federal agencies and private-sector bodies known as Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations (ISAOs) who are being set up to help monitor and disrupt attacks.

    However, privacy groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation have questioned the proposed legal immunity, arguing existing rules allow companies to coordinate sufficiently already and challenging a potential provision that could allow the Homeland Security Department to share data in “near real time” with the NSA, FBI and secret service............"

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/13/obama-cybersecurity-bill-privacy-campaigners-warning
     
  3. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    I have a solution for all internet security and other issues:

    After a two-year period the internet would be totally dismantled.

    For a two-year period prior to dismantling, every internet user in every country would be assessed a fee collected by his/her respective government of 1 cent for every website visited.

    After two years the amassed funds would be allocated among the various counties or similar type subdivisions. The County would be given the authority to take by eminent domain 100,000 square acres and build on that property a structure large enough to house every a copy of every book,newspaper,magazine,blog, research paper, film, article, photo, selfie, etc., etc., ever published,and would be required to keep it's inventory current.

    All residents of the surrounding areas would be given free access to all materials contained within these mega structures. Privacy,which for all practical purposes is a myth would be forgotten and telephone,telegraph, and amateur ham radio would come back into vogue.

    The collapse of Amazon,etc., would allow for a rebuilding of locality based economies.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2015
  4. guest

    guest Guest

    Lol hawki. :D

    This is not going to last. Banning encryption is a silly idea. It is literally a suicide. At best, the proposal will be rejected.
     
  5. driekus

    driekus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Posts:
    489
    I should clarify point original article. It was banning all encryption that the UK government couldnt read.

    UK has crazy parliamentary system. If David Cameron was elected with a solid majority it could easily go through.
     
  6. guest

    guest Guest

    Which is silly. What? We ought to rely upon weak encryption to protect our bank accounts? No way.
     
  7. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,029
    Remember the Clipper Chip?

    That's the real reason why Al Gore didn't win ;)
     
  8. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    318
    I'm sure many politicians would be concerned about their privacy just as much as regular citizens so I would be surprised if Cameron could get such a bill through parliament.
     
  9. trott3r

    trott3r Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    UK
    This is the problem in the UK one party comes up with a daft idea and it gets through parliment.

    We have lots of dumb laws in the UK like the dangerous dogs act which dont include some dangerous dogs and include some safer breeds.
    Rushed through reactionary legislation is bad but politicians dont care as long as they score political points.
    (you have to be seen to be doing something in UK politics while not actually addressing the problem)
     
  10. driekus

    driekus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Posts:
    489
    Want to know if I am missing anything here

    Dear Prime Minister Cameron,

    Congratulations on your decision to hold all of the security on the internet for the UK. In preparation for transfer of the keys to all encrypted communications I ask that for the sake of the people you do the following.

    1.) If you do decide to use a password to secure UK communications avoid the following:
    • DavidCameronRocks!
    • NSAforever
    • DoyoustilllovemeObama
    • Your wife and childrens name (we can probably figure them out)
    • The same password as your facebook, twitter and linkedin account
    • Monkey (for some odd reason people like this one)
    • Password
    • 123456
    2.) Please do not send the encryption keys to your friends in email, you never know who could be eavesdropping
    3.) When the USA, Canada and Australia join the party and get their keys try not to all use the same password
    4.) Dont share it with US Central Command, they have really crap password management
    5.) Dont share it with the Queen as she may email the password to Charles and ask why her Netflix password isnt working

    Your loyal subject,
    Driekus

    PS. God Save the Queen
     
  11. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,150
    Location:
    UK
    Leaving aside the electioneering, I think this is part of a PR campaign where Cameron is a pawn, where something daft is proposed, and then they assess the reaction. It will not be restricted to the UK, because the nation state is losing its power and relevance.

    But the end game is going to be an unholy public-private partnership where the corporate and state do a cosy deal - with licensed operators (the big social media companies) offering bulk data retention and an API for the spooks - all under warrant and with rigorous oversight (Ha!) Win-win for everyone except the public. Anyone operating outside this process will be banned. And back to centralized control, just like the days when the circuit-switched telecom guys ruled the roost.
     
  12. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,126
    Yes.
    This is part of a trend where we are more and more monitored in the name of our own safety, to the point of losing what remains of our privacy and hence our freedom.
    The Internet is the perfect tool for paternalist governments, but it can also be a weapon against it. I can see the Web fragmenting into thousands of small, locally run providers, bypassing the large ISPs, together with new technologies like 3D printing, and being the cradle for a decentralized way of power.
     
  13. StillBorn

    StillBorn Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Posts:
    162
    Mirimir raises an interesting proposition why "That's the real reason Al Gore didn't win." What's much more disturbing is how an electoral populace with "presumably" an IQ north of 90 points could possibly elect the same man into the presidential office twice. (WTF!) I'll wager that at least 70% of this same voting population never laid hands on Orwell's "1984" nor could they give a damn about encryption for any reason no matter what as long as we have Fox News, The Simpsons (not that there's anything wrong with that), Super Bowls, and the Cooking Channel to pacify. George O. was right about his seemingly inevitable "Big Brother" bleak predictions albeit 50 or so years too early. And with the prevailing apathy, gross stupidity, and laziness of the masses at large; may as well throw in a lil' of Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" for the perfect picture of the shape of things to come within the next 20 years.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2015
  14. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,962
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Thread Closed As Per Policy.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.