UK.gov Is Launching An Anti-Facebook Encryption Push (theregister.com) 33
The British government is preparing to launch a full-scale policy assault against Facebook as the company gears up to introduce end-to-end encryption across all of its services. The Register reports: Prominent in details briefed to the news media this week (including The Register) were accusations that Facebook harbours paedophiles, terrorists, and mobsters and that British police forces would effectively be blinded to the scale of criminality on the social networking platform, save for cases where crimes are reported. It's a difficult and nuanced topic made no simpler or easier by the fact that government officials seem hellbent on painting it in black and white.
Government and law enforcement officials who briefed the press on condition of anonymity earlier this week* sought to paint a picture of the internet going dark if Facebook's plans for end-to-end encryption (E2EE) went forward, in terms familiar to anyone who remembers how Western nation states defended themselves from public upset after former NSA sysadmin Edward Snowden's 2013 revelations of illegal mass surveillance. The US National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) generates around 20 million reports of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) every year, of which 70 per cent would be "lost" if E2E encryption were put in place, claimed British officials.
The government's long-signaled push to deter Facebook from implementing E2EE comes, inevitably, at a significant cost to taxpayers: London ad agency M&C Saatchi has been hired at an undisclosed cost by the Home Office to tell the public that Facebook (and WhatsApp) harbours criminals. The ad campaign will run online, in newspapers and on radio stations with the aim of turning public opinion against E2EE -- and, presumably, driving home the message that encryption itself is something inherently bad. Other announcements due this week, from notoriously anti-encryption Home Secretary Priti Patel and intergovernmental meetings, will explicitly condemn Facebook's contemplated rollout of E2EE.
Government and law enforcement officials who briefed the press on condition of anonymity earlier this week* sought to paint a picture of the internet going dark if Facebook's plans for end-to-end encryption (E2EE) went forward, in terms familiar to anyone who remembers how Western nation states defended themselves from public upset after former NSA sysadmin Edward Snowden's 2013 revelations of illegal mass surveillance. The US National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) generates around 20 million reports of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) every year, of which 70 per cent would be "lost" if E2E encryption were put in place, claimed British officials.
The government's long-signaled push to deter Facebook from implementing E2EE comes, inevitably, at a significant cost to taxpayers: London ad agency M&C Saatchi has been hired at an undisclosed cost by the Home Office to tell the public that Facebook (and WhatsApp) harbours criminals. The ad campaign will run online, in newspapers and on radio stations with the aim of turning public opinion against E2EE -- and, presumably, driving home the message that encryption itself is something inherently bad. Other announcements due this week, from notoriously anti-encryption Home Secretary Priti Patel and intergovernmental meetings, will explicitly condemn Facebook's contemplated rollout of E2EE.
Consistent (Score:4, Informative)
Would be consistent with existing law in the UK, where VPN providers are already required to log everything you do.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Facebook harbours paedophiles, terrorists, and mobsters
The UK government hates competition, everyone should know that. If you want to be a successful paedophile or mobster, be one in parliament, not on Fecebook.
Re: (Score:2)
So, you hate the Tories, and are for Labour? Or the SNP?
Free speech chilled (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's not quite right.
Originally there was a requirement for various telecommunication providers to keep some logs, but it was declared incompatible with the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. So the law was amended in 2018 to only require it on receipt of a valid request from the Secretary of State.
Of course now that the UK has brexited itself in the foot there is nothing stopping the government from changing that.
For VPN providers based outside the UK it's not entirely clear what the legal situation is. I
Re: Meh (Score:1)
Might be easier to start loading the ark ship B
https://hitchhikers.fandom.com... [fandom.com]
Re:Meh (Score:4, Insightful)
If anything, it's the luddites that have it right. The only way to fight a despotic, control-freak government (or any private institution really) is through the adoption of technology that they do not control, only for them to either embrace it or demand full control of it (case in point: the current article). Rinse and repeat for a technological arms-race where everyone is a slave to everyone and the only winning move is to not even have a phone.
What tells you that the Mars colony won't have the same issues, except that you will have to wear that ankle bracelet because you can't even step outside the colony without their explicit blessing?
As much as I like the optimism, we need to remember that centuries ago, people came to the Americas all starry-eyed and with great hopes of freedom and prosperity in their heart. Fast-forward to today, and we ended up with the civilization you so aptly described. Good luck escaping The Americas 2.0 with even more control built into its very design.
Re: (Score:2)
There's already chatter from Elon that he wants to set up a system whereby his companies cover the cost of your trip, and essentially owns you once you're there until you've "paid it back" in labor. Specifically because he wants diversity and not just ultra-wealthy in his colonies. Mars is a cool goal, and the dreamers (like me) really want to see it happen, but hearing indentured servitude being part of the plan is a bit heartbreaking. Didn't we do away with that shit for a reason?
I expect the first pop
Re:Meh (Score:4, Insightful)
This iteration of civilisation is obviously going to trash... encryption is bad... 5g is bad... vaccines are bad...
How very ironic that the overwhelming majority of "bad" shit being pushed around related to encryption, 5G, or vaccines, comes from social media.
Ever consider the fact that social media is the ACTUAL bad thing here, instead of everything else? I mean seriously, this is like complaining that being poisoned by snakes is bad, and being bitten by snakes is bad, and being constricted to death by snakes is bad, but somehow snakes aren't the bad problem.
Can we pleas get on with colonising Mars, Elon... but with some reasonabke criteria of selecting colonsts - not just money, it does not guarantee one is not a luddite.
When social media is the constant denominator that enables humans to become ignorant luddites, I'd say it's pretty obvious what we need to leave behind on planet Narcissist.
Social media isnâ(TM)t the real issue, a lack (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When everyone has to look after their own things, the problem elements very quickly disappear. People have made the mistake of outsourcing the responsibility of hosting their private blogs, photo sharing and the like to large companies which want to try and make their service into a form of for-profit public commons - the worst of both worlds. Instead, everyone should run their own software to publish their own content under their own rules and use their own best judgment in deciding upon the quantity and quality of user submitted content, if they even want to allow that rather than using pingbacks or the like.
I agree with you, but that will never happen. For many reasons.
As compared to today, there's NO profit involved in that, mainly because the average social media user doesn't have a damn clue as to how to build and maintain those services themselves, and if they did you would have 1% of the participation we have today, mainly because it ain't free. (Consumers are so brainwashed with the "free" price tag that they are now offended at the idea of anyone having the unmitigated gall to charge money for certain
Re: (Score:2)
Ever consider the fact that social media is the ACTUAL bad thing here, instead of everything else?
The thing about social media is that it's all about the name. "social" media. It doesn't create opinions. It doesn't publish new content. It is very much a reflection of the society itself. You know what I don't get on social media? Any of the bad things you list, because I don't surround myself with morons.
I find it hilarious that people think this bullshit started with social media. It's almost like you think stupid people didn't exist before 2004.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever consider the fact that social media is the ACTUAL bad thing here, instead of everything else?
The thing about social media is that it's all about the name. "social" media. It doesn't create opinions. It doesn't publish new content. It is very much a reflection of the society itself. You know what I don't get on social media? Any of the bad things you list, because I don't surround myself with morons.
I'm not even on social media, and yet even I can see the obvious impact it has within both society and government, as it has become highly political. To simply say "I don't see a problem", is ignorant at best. Like most, you've probably never seen a murder happen before. That doesn't mean murder doesn't exist.
I find it hilarious that people think this bullshit started with social media. It's almost like you think stupid people didn't exist before 2004.
Stupid people DID exist before 2004. We just didn't have a society that recognized Attention Whore as a legitimate paid profession back then, with Greed fanning the flames of mass narcissism, as if
Remember, Remember ... (Score:2)
... the Fifth of November.
(International Bank-Run Day)
How about legally reducing my privacy (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If surveillance by the state was transparent, then the public would generally have the right to know what kind of dirt they've dug up on you. Otherwise, how would you know what they're doing with what they've gathered on your neighbor?
Encryption is inherently bad? (Score:3, Informative)
Why are you trying to hide your medical records?
For that matter, why do you have shades or curtains on your windows? Physical windows, not Microsoft which needs curtains.
You should not be allowed to whisper, you might be plotting something.
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
Cardinal-Duc de Richelieu et de Fronsac (9 September 1585 â" 4 December 1642)
A load of crap (Score:5, Insightful)
If that kind of security makes things difficult for the cops, it also makes things difficult for the criminals. If something is widely available to the public, it's widely available to cops. They're part of the public, you can't tell an anonymous cop from an anonymous non-cop apart on the Internet.
So to find the smaller enterprises, it means returning to social engineering, informants, and detective work instead of hoping you can just look something up on social media... except of course with a warrant they'll give you access anyway.
Boo hoo. You're paid to do a job, and you are supposed to do it in a way that makes the world better, not worse. If that makes your job a bit more difficult... THAT'S THE JOB.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK idolizes cops, and often rules are made on the assumption that they can police themselves.
For example, cops were given the power to request search records from search engines. Each request is reviewed by the police themselves. Turns out they were rubber stamping 100s of thousands of requests per year. That was not considered to be a problem.
Fuck the British government, (Score:1)
with a chainsaw. I hate it that those hypocritical bastards, (who protect at least one pedophile in their parasitic royal family), force me to side with Facebook on anything.
Hyphens: get them right, especially in headlines (Score:3)
"An Anti-Facebook Encryption Push" is a push to be anti-Facebook by using encryption.
"An Anti-Facebook-Encryption Push" is a push against Facebook's use of encryption.
What, no drug trafficking? (Score:2)
You left out a horseman [wikipedia.org], dear feds.
Seriously, they don't even try to hide it anymore. Are we already that complacent?
Translation... (Score:2)
For those who have difficulty translating government-speak.
The UK government is saying that if they can't monitor everything you (and everyone else) do 24/7, some people might get away with crimes.
Re: (Score:2)
Governments all over the world keep saying this shit, but have we seen anything come of it? I mean, they keep saying they need ALL THE DATA ALL THE TIME TO STOP CRIME! But does it every lead them anywhere? Are crime rates down across the board? Uh, no. Not really. So what good does making us all feel anal probed twenty four seven do? Do governments just have a fetish about filling hard drives? Do they even know how to sort through the data they've already stolen from us? It's frustrating as hell t
"UK.gov" is a domain name (Score:2)
"The UK Government" is what is meant.
Style over fashion.
nothing to hide nothing to fear (Score:1)
now hand over your papers peon.
Oh and we need an extra 5 quid a week off you all to redecorate the Palace and cover the cost of Charles's correnation.
Harbouring criminals (Score:2)
London ad agency M&C Saatchi has been hired at an undisclosed cost by the Home Office to tell the public that Facebook (and WhatsApp) harbours criminals.
As a UK citizen who has been observing the actions of my government over the last few years, it is my opinion that the UK government harbours quite a lot of criminals.
How ironic (Score:2)