General Discussion

Kablooie

(18,634 posts) Wed Jul 1, 2015, 08:36 PM Jul 2015

David Cameron is going to try and ban encryption in Britain

David Cameron has signalled that he intends to ban strong encryption — putting the British government on a collision course with some of the biggest tech companies in the world.

Strong encryption refers to the act of scrambling information in such a way that it cannot be understood by anyone — even law enforcement with a valid warrant, or the software company itself — without the correct key or password.

It’s a difficult situation. On the one hand, it’s easy to sympathise with law enforcement, who fear that large amounts of communications data they previously had access to are now “going dark.” But security experts warn that any attempt to weaken encryption or introduce “back doors” for the authorities can have unintended and dangerous consequences. There’s no back door that can only be used by the good guys, they argue, and weakening the tech will put consumers at risk from criminals and hackers.

There's a serious problem with these plans, however: Dozens of top tech companies all incorporate strong encryption into their products, and are unlikely to budge on the issue.

These companies are highly unlikely to agree to any demand from Cameron's government to weaken their encryption product, in part because it would create an extremely dangerous precedent. If Apple provides back doors in its software for Britain, then why not China, or Russia, or Saudi Arabia?

Further complicating the matter is that millions of activists, dissidents, journalists and whistleblowers around the world already use strong encryption products (like PGP) to keep their sensitive communications secure. It's inconceivable that the developers of such tools would agree to Cameron's plans, as any backdoor would endanger the lives of activists that rely on the service worldwide.

http://www.businessinsider.com/david-cameron-encryption-back-doors-iphone-whatsapp-2015-7

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Cameron is going to try and ban encryption in Britain (Original Post) Kablooie Jul 2015 OP

He will fail, I suspect. nt MADem Jul 2015 #1

Ultimately he will fail no matter what. Kablooie Jul 2015 #3

I don't think parliament will buy off on it, either. nt MADem Jul 2015 #4

He will fail. BillZBubb Jul 2015 #2

Sounds like bullshit. Oneironaut Jul 2015 #5

Cannot be done. Cannot. Might as well ban water from being wet. n/t yodermon Jul 2015 #6

MADem

(135,425 posts)

1. He will fail, I suspect. nt

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 08:42 PM

Jul 2015

Kablooie

(18,634 posts)

3. Ultimately he will fail no matter what.

Reply to MADem (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 08:50 PM

Jul 2015

There's no way to actually implement this effectively. Pandora's box is open and you can't stuff the demons back in.
Does he think terrorists will meekly follow the law and only use insecure communications?

The big issue will he be supported enough so that he forces an attempt to implement it.

BTW: Law enforcement in the US is also insisting on having a backdoor to all encryption but the discussions have just started with the tech community.

MADem

(135,425 posts)

4. I don't think parliament will buy off on it, either. nt

Reply to Kablooie (Reply #3)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 08:55 PM

Jul 2015

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)

2. He will fail.

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 08:46 PM

Jul 2015

It is a fools errand anyway since any halfway decent programmer can create a strong encryption program and distribute it.

Oneironaut

(5,495 posts)

5. Sounds like bullshit.

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 09:19 PM

Jul 2015

Encryption is programmed into the program itself - it's not like you can say, "Click that button and a different type of encryption will be used!" Of the companies that actually listened, those that did would have to make changes to their applications. What about apps created by no longer existing companies?

Secondly, strong encryption is used because it's safer - it can't be brute forced (unless if you have a billion or so years to spare). That's why no one can ever hack into bank records, etc. When the time comes that it can be (which isn't even close), better encryption will have been created anyways.

Third, you can't just ban a type of computer code: If you could, there would be no such thing as viruses. Do you think criminals are going to say, "Let's stop using AES-256 encryption because the UK government said so?" They'll just create underground applications. It would be as easy to do as it is now.

PS - Any real encryption obfuscates data to the point that it's indistinguishable from any other type of encryption. Even through analysis you wouldn't be able to tell what type of encryption was used.

yodermon

(6,143 posts)

6. Cannot be done. Cannot. Might as well ban water from being wet. n/t

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Wed Jul 1, 2015, 10:18 PM

Jul 2015

Reply to this discussion