http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/590061/WhatsApp-UK-Ban-Weeks-Snoopers-Charter

Be careful what you write and which photos you send. Someone will be reading them.

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

Same reason I don’t expect the government to install cameras in my home to watch my every waking moment, or have every subject fitted with a microphone so every word spoken van be recorded.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bbc-and-royal-mail-using-ripa-terror-powers-to-spy-on-public-8070057.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8868757/Councils-have-mounted-millions-of-snooping-operations-in-past-decade-finds-report.html

Nothing to worry about tormy…you just keep being a good sheep 😉

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

This saying really irks me. If I want someone to listen to my private business I will invite them to do so. I don’t expect my private communication to be open season for anyone who has the right tools to view it (not just the government, hackers, cyber criminals…..).

Mr Clegg has it right “We have every right to invade the privacy of terrorists and those we think want to do us harm, but we should not equate that with invading the privacy of every single person in the UK. They are not the same thing.”

The only winners in this are the VPN companies!!!

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

Because I believe that the foundation of a free society is the right to privacy.
Because I don’t trust the security forces to act responsibly and within the prescribed guidelines.
Because I don’t believe the storage of collected data will appropriately safeguarded.
Because the weaker the encryption the more likely it is that messages will be intercepted by people other than those authorised to do so and for purpose outside the remit of any legislation.

This goes beyond that. What the government is asking is for a ban to all end to end secure encryption.

Significantly this includes the HTTPS protocol; that is the technology used to keep your credit card details safe when buying online, your internet banking sessions secure etc.

Basically, it is poorly thought out with (no surprises there then) and if hackers can get in (which if there’s a door there’s a way) then no secure transactions can take place over the net.

I do not think it will pass in its current form for this reason but the stupidity of politicians when it comes to tech issues is staggering.

I do not think it will pass in its current form for this reason but the stupidity of politicians when it comes to tech issues is staggering.

Mr Clegg has it right “We have every right to invade the privacy of terrorists and those we think want to do us harm, but we should not equate that with invading the privacy of every single person in the UK. They are not the same thing.”

While I agree with this I’m not sure how you can identify the lone/random terrorists without some sort of wider surveillance to find them in the first place. Just at a practical level.

All those people who were so smug about kicking Clegg and the Liberals in the election might be having regrets after this and the budget this week?

The Guardian Project apps are more relevant than ever…

https://guardianproject.info/apps/

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

Edward Snowden makes a good point:

Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.

Torminalis – Member

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

I’m having a **** right now, so, I’d prefer Theresa May wasn’t watching.

Bet you 10p that these stories turn out to be fuss about nothing- so that we don’t fuss about the something that we should be fussing about.

<ambiguous swear filter is ambiguous>

If you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

I’ll pop round later to watch you and your missus on the job then, shall I? After all, you’ve got nothing to hide. What time shall I get there?

Stupid idea anyway, how’s it going to work? Banning encrypted traffic? You can kiss goodbye to online banking, online shopping… it’s only the same principle.

I’ll pop round later to watch you and your missus on the job then, shall I?

You can “do it” over Whatsapp? Cool. I’m downloading..

The only thing that is certain is that Cameron is a moron. Who voted him back in ffs.

Banning encrypted traffic? You can kiss goodbye to online banking, online shopping

get around that by posting the credit card no. and 3 digit code and expiry on a postcard. not a letter – that’ll get redirected to GCHQ to be opened. only a post card will do.

all MPs are morons

While I agree with this I’m not sure how you can identify the lone/random terrorists without some sort of wider surveillance to find them in the first place. Just at a practical level.

Go and read some of the Snowden leaks 🙂 There is some very enlightening stuff.

What terrifies me in all this is that policy is being made – well, proposed at least – by politicians who’ve discussed IP addresses in Parliament in the believe that IP means Intellectual Property.

Traffic should be encrypted by default, not because people have ‘things to hide’ but to prevent hacks, “man in the middle” attacks and so on. How anyone thinks that a good way of improving security by removing it should be automatically excluded from having a say in it.

On the upside, the report is in The Express, who I wouldn’t trust to report on a school play.

And where does it end? I’m all for surveillance on people of interest, we need to combat all sorts of crime.

Blanket surveillance, banning encryption etc gives those in power too much power. I’m not convinced they won’t use it to their own advantage when it comes to politics and business. The opportunity for miss use is vast.

Also what kind of country are where we are recorded on CCTV a silly amount of times a day, all communications are monitored and all encryption is possibly going to be banned. While day to day it might make little difference to my life or yours (for the time being) when I do think about it, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

banning encryption etc gives those in power too much power

Moreover, banning encryption gives criminals too much power.

Govt is one thing but the amount of information you are happy to give for free via Google, your mobile, browsing history, likes on facebook is far scarier, IMHO. Commercial companies, rarely taking care of your data and using it for all sorts to affect the price you pay.

See how you googled for holiday deals? Don’t be surprised when the price goes up at the time of booking because they know you are interested and willing to pay more. Car insurance uses postcode, but have linked that with what devices you have, how often you use internet, what TV channels you watch and how often to give you a different price.

But this is fair game and business so nobody is going to regulate that – they just point to the fact they told you what they were going to do and you hit Accept when you logged in. Ten years ago I’d have locked myself up for being ridiculously paranoid, but seeing what information Acorn, Fizz, Mosaic have and how it is being deployed it’s here. I’d suggest the regulation is in the wrong place.

Moreover, banning encryption gives criminals too much power.

That is a good point, so which way do we go? Like you said, it has implications beyond criminal activity.

Stupid idea anyway, how’s it going to work? Banning encrypted traffic? You can kiss goodbye to online banking, online shopping… it’s only the same principle.

Significantly this includes the HTTPS protocol; that is the technology used to keep your credit card details safe when buying online, your internet banking sessions secure etc.

Basically, it is poorly thought out with (no surprises there then) and if hackers can get in (which if there’s a door there’s a way) then no secure transactions can take place over the net.

Well, I’m looking forward to a conservative casued financial meltdown that will take us back to a cash only society.

@cougar. Sadly I fear for once the Express is right on this one. Cameron wanted to do it in the last parliament but the Lib Dems wouldn’t let him.

Australia is also considering such idiocy…

Oh and if should be noted this would also make any form of secure corporate WAN illegal too.

Badly thought out doesn’t even come close…

Isn’t the stupid thing assuming that the Internet is secure?

Dont post anything if you would be concerned that someone might access it. Stick by this rule and you will be ok…

The way the draft bill is worded does not aim to make Facebook et Al accessible to the security services but aims to ban point to point encryption over the Internet.

The https protocol is secure. Its the basis of online banking etc. If you assumed it was not sure you would not shop online, bank online, have business data flowing from one site to another etc.
To make it illegal is just utter nonsense…

Well, companies will just leave the uk if that happens won’t they danny. Nothing speaks louder than money…..

15 years later this hip hop song is more pertinent than it ever has been.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5vw4ajnWGA[/video]

@Tom, I don’t give two hoots which country my bank is based in but I am bothered if I can access my account securely online.

I also would not be able to shop online or discuss confidential ideas with associates via Skype etc.

Buy your car tax online. Not anymore. Use the new electronic repeat prescription service, only if your not bothered about world plus dog seeing your medical records.

It really is this serious if it goes through..