3 ms·

So are Whatsapp, Signal and Apple going to keep their word or has some minuscule thing changed in the legislation that they can backpedal by saying it's now fin

• lambdas 3y ago
  Their opposition was that the motion was still in flux on the wording, and could have outright said “E2EE is illegal, we want either A) a backdoor into encryption if you use it B) on device monitoring for harmful content”. It came to pass that MP’s realised they couldn’t do that… yet. So what has actually gone in is some vague wording on “should the technology become available you’ll have to implement it”. Now most people are taking that as a win, that the wording is admitting defeat. Surely you can’t circumvent privacy whilst maintaining freedoms, you may as well put in “when 1+1=3”. And the companies are saying that’s fine, it doesn’t affect us. But you can’t help but feel pessimistic. That clause is Chekhov’s gun, it’s put in there in its nebulous state exactly to be vague. I’ve no doubt in the coming years there’ll be a consensus where “the technology is available” comes down to MITM or something.
  • elephanlemon 3y ago
    Makes me think of the approach Apple attempted
• dfawcus 3y ago
  Nothing changed in the legislation from when those companies stated their concerns. All that happened is a gov spokesman stood on his hind legs in the Lords, and in effect said "Trust us. we won't use these powers - yet".