United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
If that means compromising encryption, which it does, then the benefits to everyone of end-to-end encryption and the protection it affords against both government overreach/abuse and third-party intruders tend to outweigh the benefits of government surveillance through encryption backdoors.
Maybe only the biggest companies should be required to be able to decrypt certain messages if a court warrant is produced. Privacy fans could use services exempt from this requirement, like Signal. But there are laypeople who just use iMessage because it's the default, and you could catch criminals sending bad stuff over iMessage.
I think there are valid concerns on both sides of the argument... but I am just imagining if you have a group of violent people planning an attack over iMessage, I want law enforcement to be able to read those messages.
Can't law enforcement already read those messages by getting a warrant to seize the suspect's phone and attempting to break into it? Why do they suddenly need to preemptively break into everyone's phone?
I guess I think of it like bugging a phone. The technology for bugging phones has been around for a long time, but that doesn't mean the authorities are bugging everybody's phones all the time. Even if they can theoretically listen to everyone's conversations, that doesn't mean they are always listening. There would be too many conversations to listen to.
Bugging a phone involves applying the bug to one phone, right? Backdooring encryption is bugging everyone's phone in advance and then hoping that the bug only ever gets used lawfully.
Also as computing power increases then it becomes more plausible to actually process all of everyone's messages. Maybe they start by automatically flagging certain words, then if you're detected using them you're automatically flagged and a warrant issued to read everything you've ever said.
Maybe I should read more about encryption. I was thinking maybe a company like Apple could just keep the encryption keys stored somewhere. So if needed they could decrypt particular messages. There could be big punishments, prison time, for anybody within Apple who decrypts messages without a court warrant.
You can probably get a better explanation by reading up on encryption, but I think most security people would say that encrypted communications where you don't hold the keys may as well not be encrypted at all. You still have to trust that someone doesn't (accidentally or deliberately) access your data, leak your keys, or otherwise break the process that keeps everything safe.
Fair enough. I will try to read more stuff about encryption.