6 ms·

This shows that the articles by those who uncovered the plans were right [e.g. 1] - even though this is a political campaign paid for by the UK public (via the

This shows that the articles by those who uncovered the plans were right [e.g. 1] - even though this is a political campaign paid for by the UK public (via the Government), and developed and coordinated by the Government, they have big logos of community groups and charities at the bottom and minimises the Government's involvement - > "According to the [M&C Saatchi] presentation, the push will appear to be the result of grassroots action and children’s charities, while downplaying any government role." The whole thing is just a pile of emotional manipulation, while compeletly ignoring the far, far greater number of legitimate uses of end to end encryption, and the actual dangers to everyday people of personal information being stolen, accessed, leaked, etc. if it's banned! Extremely dirty tactics. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29955893 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29955893

pydry 5y ago
- bitexploder 5y ago
  That is wild and I never knee about it, but how is that related to the current story?
- vl5jn 5y ago
mojzu 5y ago
The only actual number on the site also doesn't seem to be sourced properly, it just sends you to the NCMEC data page, or are they just assuming that they'll lose all of Facebook's submissions if they turn on E2E?
tomxor 5y ago
> dangers to everyday people of personal information being stolen, accessed, leaked, etc This campaign is ripe for hijacking and inverting like the "you wouldn't steal a car" campaign. "NO WHERE TO HIDE: (from criminals)... thought you were safe when writing innocuous private messages on Facebook? think again, criminals intercept the plaintext to commit identity fraud in your name. Thought you only had to worry about corporate surveillance of your location data? think again, now criminals can easily track you to break into your house while you are out. Thought your job was secure? think again, now criminals can build a comprehensive profile of your social and work activities to easily and effectively social engineer their way into your organisation, risking your livelihood." [edit] The other approach is to apply the same thinking to something non technical to more tangibly demonstrate how this is a bad idea. e.g: "NO WAY TO RUN: we are banning wheels, because they help paedophiles make for a quick getaway after abducting their target. In future we plan on banning legs too."
- dijit 5y ago
  The more fun thing to do is to manipulate messages in transport. There was a really fun game where you could join public wifi and change every image request response to be images of cats instead. (by changing the requesting URL and/or response). This idea was borne from the 'upside-down-ternet' which people ran on their Guest Networks. (https://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html https://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html) Would be fun to have a word replace running for "Thank You" to "Fuck You", it's not at all impossible to do.
  - chewxy 5y ago
    Oh wow this brings back memories. More than a decade ago I lived in shared housing where each room has its own telephone port. The idea was every person was supposed to get their own internet. But after a few months of troubleshooting my housemates' internet issues I decided to open up my wifi to everyone else. I used Chillidog, a captive portal software that runs on ddwrt. I had a 3 hour continuous-use limit, after which weird stuff would happen to their images like being turned upsidedown or blurred. I used this very site to make it happen! Eventually, my housemates just contributed to my internet bill and dropped their own subscriptions. I got rid of the captive portal and went with something more traditional
- IshKebab 5y ago
  The idea that criminals will break into Facebook's servers and steal your messages is was less likely than the government using Facebook messages to catch child abusers, and that's already a little dubious. A better counter-argument is foreign governments (China, Russia, etc.) requiring data to be held on their soil and then using it to hunt and impression political enemies.
  - boffinAudio 5y ago
    Without end-to-end encryption, one doesn't need to break into anyones servers. Thats sort of the point. Without encryption, you are weak at every packet, which can be intercepted anywhere between you and Facebooks servers.
belter 5y ago
The only thing you need to know is at the bottom of the page: "The campaign is funded by the UK Government and..."
- zohch 5y ago
rob_c 5y ago
Given our (UK) present govts history and tragging on anti BLM/eco pretesting things onto a needed bill in the commons I'm not surprised they're taking this route. It might even appear on the BBC before the year is out of it would save Boris' skin...
miohtama 5y ago
Here is the Twitter account of M&C Saatchi Group if you want to leave public feedback: https://twitter.com/mcsaatchigroup https://twitter.com/mcsaatchigroup Their slogan is to deliver Meaningful Change.
tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
> big logos of community groups and charities at the bottom Are those actually legit charities? I've never heard of them before, and at least the rightmost one ("SafeToNet - incorporating NetNanny") sounds like it's just a lobby group of some internet filter company, or an Internet filtering company itself. If those are legit charities: Remember the names and make it known among friends what those charities are supporting. https://www.mariecollinsfoundation.org.uk/ https://www.mariecollinsfoundation.org.uk/ proudly sports the logos of Microsoft, Google and Facebook at the bottom of the page. Maybe those companies should be made aware of what they're indirectly supporting with their logo.
- dbbk 5y ago
  Barnardo's is quite well known.
andrepd 5y ago
The part that interests me the most is when they say "we're not opposed to E2E encryption on principle, as long as we can still safeguard child protection", but then fail to actually specify how this should be done, except by opposing E2E encryption on principle. I'd love to know if there's a solution!
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  E2E is something that does protect children too for that matter, so the case cannot be made. Of course children might access inappropriate content, but that is an issue of parenting and you cannot make the internet safe for children without getting active and curate what they access.

pydry 5y ago

bitexploder 5y ago
That is wild and I never knee about it, but how is that related to the current story?
vl5jn 5y ago

mojzu 5y ago

The only actual number on the site also doesn't seem to be sourced properly, it just sends you to the NCMEC data page, or are they just assuming that they'll lose all of Facebook's submissions if they turn on E2E?

tomxor 5y ago

> dangers to everyday people of personal information being stolen, accessed, leaked, etc This campaign is ripe for hijacking and inverting like the "you wouldn't steal a car" campaign. "NO WHERE TO HIDE: (from criminals)... thought you were safe when writing innocuous private messages on Facebook? think again, criminals intercept the plaintext to commit identity fraud in your name. Thought you only had to worry about corporate surveillance of your location data? think again, now criminals can easily track you to break into your house while you are out. Thought your job was secure? think again, now criminals can build a comprehensive profile of your social and work activities to easily and effectively social engineer their way into your organisation, risking your livelihood." [edit] The other approach is to apply the same thinking to something non technical to more tangibly demonstrate how this is a bad idea. e.g: "NO WAY TO RUN: we are banning wheels, because they help paedophiles make for a quick getaway after abducting their target. In future we plan on banning legs too."

dijit 5y ago
The more fun thing to do is to manipulate messages in transport. There was a really fun game where you could join public wifi and change every image request response to be images of cats instead. (by changing the requesting URL and/or response). This idea was borne from the 'upside-down-ternet' which people ran on their Guest Networks. (https://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html https://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html) Would be fun to have a word replace running for "Thank You" to "Fuck You", it's not at all impossible to do.
- chewxy 5y ago
  Oh wow this brings back memories. More than a decade ago I lived in shared housing where each room has its own telephone port. The idea was every person was supposed to get their own internet. But after a few months of troubleshooting my housemates' internet issues I decided to open up my wifi to everyone else. I used Chillidog, a captive portal software that runs on ddwrt. I had a 3 hour continuous-use limit, after which weird stuff would happen to their images like being turned upsidedown or blurred. I used this very site to make it happen! Eventually, my housemates just contributed to my internet bill and dropped their own subscriptions. I got rid of the captive portal and went with something more traditional
IshKebab 5y ago
The idea that criminals will break into Facebook's servers and steal your messages is was less likely than the government using Facebook messages to catch child abusers, and that's already a little dubious. A better counter-argument is foreign governments (China, Russia, etc.) requiring data to be held on their soil and then using it to hunt and impression political enemies.
- boffinAudio 5y ago
  Without end-to-end encryption, one doesn't need to break into anyones servers. Thats sort of the point. Without encryption, you are weak at every packet, which can be intercepted anywhere between you and Facebooks servers.

belter 5y ago

The only thing you need to know is at the bottom of the page: "The campaign is funded by the UK Government and..."

zohch 5y ago

rob_c 5y ago

Given our (UK) present govts history and tragging on anti BLM/eco pretesting things onto a needed bill in the commons I'm not surprised they're taking this route. It might even appear on the BBC before the year is out of it would save Boris' skin...

miohtama 5y ago

Here is the Twitter account of M&C Saatchi Group if you want to leave public feedback: https://twitter.com/mcsaatchigroup https://twitter.com/mcsaatchigroup Their slogan is to deliver Meaningful Change.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago

> big logos of community groups and charities at the bottom Are those actually legit charities? I've never heard of them before, and at least the rightmost one ("SafeToNet - incorporating NetNanny") sounds like it's just a lobby group of some internet filter company, or an Internet filtering company itself. If those are legit charities: Remember the names and make it known among friends what those charities are supporting. https://www.mariecollinsfoundation.org.uk/ https://www.mariecollinsfoundation.org.uk/ proudly sports the logos of Microsoft, Google and Facebook at the bottom of the page. Maybe those companies should be made aware of what they're indirectly supporting with their logo.

dbbk 5y ago
Barnardo's is quite well known.

andrepd 5y ago

The part that interests me the most is when they say "we're not opposed to E2E encryption on principle, as long as we can still safeguard child protection", but then fail to actually specify how this should be done, except by opposing E2E encryption on principle. I'd love to know if there's a solution!

raxxorrax 5y ago
E2E is something that does protect children too for that matter, so the case cannot be made. Of course children might access inappropriate content, but that is an issue of parenting and you cannot make the internet safe for children without getting active and curate what they access.