3 ms·

It's an inevitable consequence of these lines of the speech he gave. I recommend you listen to the whole thing to understand it properly in context [0]: "But t

by spuz 12y ago

It's an inevitable consequence of these lines of the speech he gave. I recommend you listen to the whole thing to understand it properly in context [0]: "But the question is are we going to allow a means of communications which it simply isn’t possible to read. My answer to that question is: no, we must not." "If I am prime minister, I will make sure that it is a comprehensive piece of legislation that makes sure we do not allow terrorists safe space to communicate with each other. That is the key principle: do we allow safe spaces for them to talk to each other? I say no, we don’t, and we should legislate accordingly." The only way to guarantee there is no "safe space for [terrorists] to talk to each other" is to ban all means of communication that cannot be decrypted. If we simply ask Whatsapp to record all their messages (and keep the decryption keys somewhere), that still leaves all kinds of encrypted communication applications available (or safe spaces) for terrorists to use. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/12/david-cameron-pledges-anti-terror-law-internet-paris-attacks-nick-clegg http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/12/david-cameron...

VBprogrammer 12y ago
I still think that is a rather literal interpretation of what he is saying. Forcing companies to allow access to data seems much more realistic, though admittedly doesn't meet the condition "no safe space for [terrorists] to talk to each other". But maybe he is a complete moron. Presumably he is going to ban the XOR operation since with a one-time pad...
- spuz 12y ago
  If he forces major companies to provide access to their data, that still leaves minor companies or open source projects to do what they want and therefore still leaves the bad guys with a place to hide. The only alternative is to ban encryption for all but those who agree to allow access by the government (with a warrant of course) which while possible is highly implausible given how much internet traffic is currently encrypted.

by spuz 12y ago

VBprogrammer 12y ago

I still think that is a rather literal interpretation of what he is saying. Forcing companies to allow access to data seems much more realistic, though admittedly doesn't meet the condition "no safe space for [terrorists] to talk to each other". But maybe he is a complete moron. Presumably he is going to ban the XOR operation since with a one-time pad...

spuz 12y ago
If he forces major companies to provide access to their data, that still leaves minor companies or open source projects to do what they want and therefore still leaves the bad guys with a place to hide. The only alternative is to ban encryption for all but those who agree to allow access by the government (with a warrant of course) which while possible is highly implausible given how much internet traffic is currently encrypted.