How do you feel about the government limiting encryption? It seems like every time they get shot down, they keep trying again a few months or a year later. I don't think they'll give up until they get what they want. It's completely impractical to ban encryption, and I think the UK gov't is starting to understand that, but using backdoors or special encryption keys to decrypt at will is just as bad. It this kind of bill goes through, you can say bye-bye to the UK's IT industry, just like how some foreign companies started pulling out of the US after the NSA revelations.
>The UK government has explicitly confirmed that a surveillance bill now making its way through the second chamber could be used to require a company to remove encryption. And even, in some circumstances, to force a comms service provider not to use end-to-end encryption to secure a future service they are developing. The details were revealed during debate of the Investigatory Powers Bill at a committee session in the House of Lords this week.
https://archive.is/PCLof
Here's another article:
>During a committee stage debate in the UK's House of Lords yesterday, the government revealed that the Investigatory Powers Bill will provide any Secretary of State with the ability to force communication service providers (CSPs) to remove or disable end-to-end encryption.
>Earl Howe, a minister of state for defence and deputy leader in the House of Lords, gave the first explicit admission that the new legislation would provide the British government with the ability to force CSPs to “develop and maintain a technical capability to remove encryption that has been applied to communications or data.”
https://archive.is/Lvr6U
Don't let shills slide this thread, for the love of God.
For the love of Christ, /pol/.
>>81364494
nah
>everyone's pissing themselves with glee at May getting in even though this stuff is her specialty just because she spouts buzzwords about muh one-nation conservatism
Off to the gulags we go, lads
>>81365746
Many of us saw this coming from a mile away, but I'm floored that this was announced while Cameron's seat was still warm.
Fuck this. I'd hoped she'd have to moderate her iron-fisted tendencies to secure the PM seat. Uprising when?
Dont care , just leave anime and preferably lolis alone please. Thanks.
>mfw May trying get into my 256 bit encryption
>>81364494
This is the snoopers charter that has been repeatedly blocked by the house lords isn't it?
ISP's will not accept it as privacy is one of the selling points of how they obtain subscriptions from customers.
Not happening, house of lords will keep rejecting it.
>>81367612
dog bless the house of lords
Ironically they are the most in touch with the common people.
>>81364494
Transgender abomination clamps down on free speech for Judeo-Masonic masters.
To think, Goy actually voted for the Torah Party.
>>81367612
House of lords can't block things permanently, only stall.
>>81364494
I have nothing to hide, why are you all so worried?
>>81367826
Can they just stall things indefinitely, like till 2020
>>81367826
It can force the commons to re-write the bill constantly and has been doing so since the first Lib Dem-Conservative coalition and it will continue to do so until the government gives up on the snoopers charter.
Most ISP's don't want this, it's not going to pass.
and OP can you stop spamming this shit in every thread? We already know about it and have done for about 6 years now.
Thanks.
>>81368289
Yes, they can.
>>81368268
I want you to strip down naked in front of me, don't worry if you've got nothing to hide you don't need to be worried do you?
>>81367724
I shouldn't like the house of lords, but I do.
I guess there's still a certain sense of noblesse oblige. A bit like the way the royal family serve in the armed forces.
>>81367305
>not using 4096-bit encryption
enjoy gulag
>>81368681
Personally I think the Lords seem to have their heads on straighter than the Commons because they don't have careers to worry about, they got their positions simply by existing and they will continue to have those positions until they stop existing or do something really titanically stupid and/or illegal.
They don't need to worry about kowtowing to their party leader on some hairbrained proposition in an attempt to get a better position, they can look at a retarded piece of legislation and say 'goodness me that's stupid, I'm going to vote against it' without fear of repercussions or politically stagnating.
>>81364494
Dude Canada already has hate speech & holocaust denial laws and literally makes media outlets get a licenses from the government
>In section 3 of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, it states media organizations should reflect "equal rights, the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature society and the special place of aboriginal peoples within that society".[6]
The Queen limiting citizens access to encryption is pretty much par for the course
>>81368353
>and OP can you stop spamming this shit in every thread?
Nobody posted here until I posted links to it in a few threads. When you consider what's spammed here every day, for weeks or months on end, I feel this is an important topic to keep this topic publicly discussed. I haven't seen a single thread on this issue since last week when I posted a thread about government surveillance and encryption. I cited a US case against someone who was charged with insider trading. He was eventually acquitted, but during the case, the prosecutors scrutinized every email, taking them out of context to make him look guilty. As you can imagine, hardly anyone posted in that thread.
>>81364494
>tfw May already living up to expectations
