– The attacks in Paris once again shows the extent of the terrorist threat we face, and the need to have robust security services that can keep our citizenry safe, said David Cameron in a speech on Monday.
The British Prime Minister blowing now dust off a controversial bill that would give security authorities new opportunities to use monitoring and electronic tracks to prevent crime and terrorism.
move comes less than a week after the terrorist attack on satire magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris, and is part of the election campaign ahead of the British general election in May.
Can affect popular messaging
In recent years, encrypted messaging has become increasingly widespread. Using so-called end-to-end encryption ensures these programs that only the sender and receiver have access to content. It has created headaches for security services worldwide, because encryption is often so effective that even the secret services can not.
Three years ago it created headlines when the Russian security police FSB wanted to ban Gmail, Hotmail and Skype, precisely because these services impossible did Russian surveillance.
Now follow David Cameron after with a bill, according to The Independent can affect popular services Whatsapp, iMessage, FaceTime and Snapchat.
– Will we allow communication methods between people who even in a crisis situation and with authorized arrest warrant can not be tapped, he asks rhetorically in the speech.
Expanded powers to the security services have long been a main issue for Cameron and the Conservative Party. The bill as it now brushed the dust off, previously rejected by liberal Democrats, included in the current coalition government. For them, the opposition to the law has become a flagship initiative – and it is thus full strife within the government about the controversial topic.
Camerons hope is to win parliamentary elections in May, escape government partner, and eventually end up with a political majority for the bill.
In his speech said Cameron that bill should include both monitoring of signal data, ie information about who is calling whom and where the phone is located, as well as opportunities to intercept the communication. He points out that the UK already have good laws and control mechanisms for security authorities surveillance, and that the new bill primarily about being able to apply these laws on content that is encrypted.
– What is important in the future is to be sure that we can obtain this information when people use increasingly modern communication methods, says Cameron.
– This is a problem also in Norway
According to Professor Inger Marie Sunde at the Police Academy, the use of encrypted communications on the web also a problem for Norwegian police authorities.
– In Norway the police allowed to eavesdrop phones under strict conditions. But if communication is encrypted, it will not have anything with bugging, since they fail to interpret the encrypted data anyway, she says and continues:
– Thus it is so encryption severe restrictions on the tools and capabilities police already have, and it’s a problem, she said.
In 2009, assessed the government-appointed Method Supervisory police’s use of so-called “hidden coercion” and “communication control”, which in reality is Authority for monitoring criminals.
In the public report dealt problems with encrypted information inbound. Despite that data sampling is seen as “integrity-violating” the Committee believes that it should be opened for the use of the method on strict conditions:
“Data reading can alternatively be targeted so the police for example only be permitted to use the procedure to obtain information that the police can already access, but in a way that is not hampered by technical protection devices in the current computer system using encryption. “
The committee came up with suggestions for a number of new amendments, which are now under consideration by the Ministry of Justice.
– Will frame many innocent
The British bill that apparently will prohibit all encryption security authorities do not have access to decode, might have serious consequences for ordinary people.
– Such prohibition may affect many citizens, but is not necessarily as accurate to the criminal . Extremists had shown themselves to be adept at exploiting new technology, says Sunde.
Professor Gisle Hannemyr at the Department of Informatics at the University of Oslo is more than agree that the bill is unlikely to be effective.– This is an improper action. It reveals a willingness to impose totalitarian methods that do not belong in a democratic society I want to stay in, he said.
He stressed that internet communications are essentially equally openly available as send a postcard. Therefore, companies and a number of players a great need to encrypt their information for competitors, criminals and any spies.
– No faith that the law adopted
– By prohibiting encryptions not approved by the authorities, will make it an offense to protect their communications. I have no faith that the law is adopted, it is going to get too many opponents, says Hannemyr and continues:
– Privacy has not yet engaged so many because people feel that it is not concern them. However, if these the new bill affects popular services Snapchat and iMessage, people will find that it affects them directly. And it can create resistance.
In the early 1990s tried NSA to offer the state-approved encryption Clipper Chip to the civilian market. Here there was a backdoor in encryption, which meant that the government could monitor communications when needed. Hannemyr comparing this initiative with the British bill.
– There was never any of this because of massive resistance. An argument against was that criminals could easily take a detour to the second encryption services for not being detected. How is it now too. If someone wants to communicate completely hidden, so they’re going to do it in the future too. A possible consequence is that those who really have something to hide resort to pre-agreed codes and messages in images like no other fail to detect, he said.
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment