ChrisKnott

8 ms·

61.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
I had assumed the report sent to law enforcement would include the actual image sent (the suspected CSAM). This is what happens at the moment with NCMEC. The comments from Alexander Hanff seem to suggest this as well.
62.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Why do you think RIPA was widely advertised as a means to combat terrorism? Here is the Home Office site from the time; https://web.archive.org/web/20000510065613/http://www.homeof... Which includes an o
63.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
> "Think of the children whose non-abusive parents send banal but confounding photos to each other, get hounded by CSAM allegations, and some fraction of whom get separated from their child." How do you see a false positive pro
64.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
It's a wonderful proof, thanks for sharing, but the notation is really just syntactic sugar, no? It would have only been slightly clumsier to have "+60" everywhere. The real insight seems more to have done the construction &q
65.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Does the milk really heat up passed the shared temperature, then back down? How does it "know" which way round it's mixed? Like if I did this on the ISS, put milk in a cup, then moved it up into a hot blob of tea, am I adding
66.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
I'm struggling to believe this can be done by taste; I could understand it if you went milk+teabag, then added water, but this seems like brewed tea in a pot added to milk in cup v.s. milk added to brewed tea in a cup, which will get t
67.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
This surprised me but I randomly checked three days and none of them had anything relating to Ukraine in "Did You Know?" https://web.archive.org/web/20220715144903/https://en.m.wiki... https:&
68.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
The Online Safety Bill doesn't grant any surveillance powers, as far as I'm aware...?
69.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
The same is true of SSL traffic to a bank though isn't it? If a crime group is intercepted encrypted traffic and saving it, then the keys are stolen, they can decrypt that data. But opponents of the OSB claim it will make communication
70.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
It was never even suggested that the government would have encryption keys. The government do not have access to SSL traffic, but companies are responsible for CSAM uploaded over SSL.
71.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
What surveillance powers? Granted by what law?
72.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
For example, the offence of "Sexual communication with a child" aka "grooming" was created in 2017 (by Serious Crime Act). Enforcing this law is one of the main causes of the arguments over the OSB.
73.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
You've sleight-of-handed out "government" for "the UK" and linked two stories which don't really involve the UK government. Furthermore if you read your own links, you will see that the "recent history&quo
74.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
It seems like "a pretty obvious coverup" to you because you are conspiratorially minded. It's actually just the FCDO explaining what the law has always been. Should the law be changed? Yes. Is this evidence of a "cover-u
75.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
This question is really too broad to answer. What sort of thing are you looking for? For a general overview of the whole system, this strategy is the best place to start. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government&#
76.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Doesn't this problem exist throughout the tech industry though? Microsoft, Google, Apple etc are keeping the keys that allow you to push updates secret, aren't they?
77.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
> "Previous laws relating to policing and investigatory powers have been widely criticised by civil rights groups for their overreach and lack of effective oversight and safeguards. We now know that some of those laws have in fact
78.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
But all the provisions service providers are expected to implement have a "reasonable" or "proportionate" qualifier, no? And the actual, practical meaning of these responsibilities will be defined in a yet-to-be-publishe
79.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
It actual exempts several categories (email servers etc). My point is that there is no reason to think the regulations that eventually come into force for services which aren't exempted will be as ridiculous as you suggest. I agree tha
80.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
By way of analogy, the government might make a law that allows, in secondary legislation, the setting of a driving speed limit. These activists are claiming that the government is secretly intending the speed limit to be 1mph. The governmen
81.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
My understanding is that the OSB creates a responsibility for Ofcom to create a regulatory system for discouraging online harms. Has Ofcom actually said what these regulations will be? Is there any reason to expect them to be as dystopian a
82.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Stealing IP is basically a blue shell. At some point probably China will be leading tech innovation and the West will have little incentive to respect their patents.
83.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
> This bill will make it so much easier for the next Wayne Couzens to find his perfect Sarah Everard How so?
84.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Are you allowed to push off the walls? I feel like the fastest possible mouse would be one that just punched itself from wall to wall.
85.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
My quote wasn't said publicly, it was from the Snowden leaks
86.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
The quote from Dennis Blair means the opposite to what you think. If ASIS is interested in a US citizen, they ask the FBI to spy on them. The FBI does this _within US law_, and gives the intelligence to Australia. This is the opposite of wh
87.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
This article supports what I said!
88.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
NSA previously hosted the original UK-USA 1946 agreement[0] which was declassified in 2010 i.e. pre-Snowden (seems to 404 now). It is limited to sharing of "foreign communications" which is defined as those not being UK/USA.
89.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
The controversy which caused this misunderstanding is that incidentally collected SIGINT (i.e. not intentionally targeted) of UK citizens, collected by NSA, was shared back with GCHQ. Because this 180 degree myth about skirting domestic law
90.
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
Your understanding of the 5 Eyes agreement is completely wrong. It is in fact an agreement to NOT spy on the citizens of the four other nations.

More ›