1200px Flag of the United KingdomAn alleged leak of a draft technical paper prepared by the U.K. government contains proposals that endorse the "live" surveillance of British web users' online communications, it emerged this week.

Civil liberties organization the Open Rights Group received the document on May 4 and decided to publish the draft, which states that telecommunications companies and internet service providers would need to provide "data in near real time" within one working day.

The paper, first reported by The Register, also states that technology companies would be required to remove encryption from private communications and provide the raw data "in an intelligible form" without "electronic protection".

If made law, the capabilities would come under the controversial Investigatory Powers (IP) Act, dubbed the "Snooper's Charter" by critics. According to the act, the access would have to be sanctioned by secretaries of state and a judge appointed by the prime minister. Telecoms firms would be forced to carry out the requirements in secret, leaving the public unaware that access had been given.

The Home Office has denied there is anything new in the consultation paper, which has reportedly been sent to affected bodies without being publicly announced by the government. However, the document reveals that bulk surveillance would occur simultaneously alongside individual access requests, but would be limited to one in every 10,000 users of a given service – or 6,500 people in the country at any one time.

The leak of the paper has re-opened the debate surrounding law enforcement agencies' demands for "back doors" in security protocols that would provide access to encrypted data, similar to the request that caused a standoff between the FBI and Apple last year.

"It seems very clear that the Home Office intends to use these [powers] to remove end-to-end encryption – or more accurately to require tech companies to remove it," said Dr Cian Murphy, a legal expert at the University of Bristol who spoke to the BBC. "I do read the regulations as the Home Office wanting to be able to have near real-time access to web chat and other forms of communication."

Home Secretary Amber Rudd recently argued that the Investigatory Powers Act offers a set of laws necessary to curb "new opportunities for terrorists" afforded by the internet. However, critics counter that the idea of creating back doors in encrypted communications would render the encryption worthless, since such access would inevitably end up in the hands of bad actors, while appearing as a green light for oppressive regimes to crack down on dissenters by compromising encrypted communications.

The U.K.'s Internet Service Providers' Association (Ispa), which represents BT, Sky, Virgin Media, TalkTalk and others, said it would be consulting its members and submitting a response to the draft regulations by May 19.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Top Rated Comments

ginkobiloba Avatar
57 months ago
Pretty ironic coming from the country that gave the world George Orwell and his classic "1984"
Score: 34 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Glassed Silver Avatar
57 months ago
How on earth did with get through the Cold War era without violating the privacy of every citizen from "red" countries. But today a few bad actors out of 1 billion Muslims demand privacy violations of EVERYBODY?!??
That's the official spin, in reality they have been wanting these powers for many many years, but now they have a few moments of fear again to feast upon and abuse to get this bullcrap through.

This has nothing to do with efficient anti-terrorism measures.

Glassed Silver:ios
Score: 29 Votes (Like | Disagree)
centauratlas Avatar
57 months ago
How about let's apply this to the politicians for a few years first. Hillary in the US and Macron in France didn't seem to like it.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Porco Avatar
57 months ago


The paper, first reported by The Register ('https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/04/uk_bulk_surveillance_powers_draft/'), also states that technology companies would be required to remove encryption from private communications and provide the raw data "in an intelligible form" without "electronic protection".
Why don't they require a gallon of rainbow unicorn milk to be served in a thimble on the eighth day of every week while they're at it?

'So just break encryption that takes thousands of years to break within one day yeah, because we're asking you to OK?'
:rolleyes:

It's scary they're even asking, but it won't really go anywhere because it can't.

Anyone who requires/desires unbreakable encryption enough will still be able to get it, so what is the point of breaking it for everyone else? All it would do would be to weaken encryption for the average innocent person.

Again, if you outlaw encryption, the only ones with encryption will be the outlaws. You can't un-invent the encryption we have, and they shouldn't want to. Idiocy.


Access must be granted by a judge and others before a request is made for the data. And that's how it is now. They'll just get more of it faster unencrypted and they'll be able to act faster on terrorists and peodophiles etc. If you want total security and anonymity without these acts to gain access to the data, then you MUST accept that this will also be given to terrorists and peodophiles etc etc in the same way. Something that some on here seem more then comfortable with :eek:
It's not about being comfortable with bad guys having the same tech that currently protects us all. It's about leaving the bad guys as the only ones to still have the protection.

A judge cannot command maths to be discarded anymore than Canute could command the tide to turn. Bad guys who are happy to break the law doing whatever will surely not care they are breaking the law to keep using outlawed encryption products, but all law-abiding citizens will be under greater threat of ID theft, fraud and various other nasty things that encryption protects us from.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
jimthing Avatar
57 months ago
This is why when a 'lone operator' apparent attack happens in the UK (like the Whitehall one a month ago), I completely shut off when the news starts reporting politicians saying 'this is an example of why our security services need better access to communications from the bad people'.

Not at the expense of mine and everyone else's right to privacy it doesn't. Who are they trying to kid here. Lone ranger attacks will happen regardless of mass surveillance of the population.
Score: 23 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Porco Avatar
57 months ago
Just for clarification, the use of secure encryption is *not* being outlawed. There is nothing wrong with people in the UK using encryption products without government-mandated backdoors. You just can't rely on any products and services from UK-based companies anymore.

Otherwise I agree with you.
I think I see the technical distinction you are making, but I think they effectively are wanting to do just that (outlaw secure encryption), at least in terms of anything that involves communications in the UK.

All I see is the usual 'American' scaremongering because you'd sooner trust a serial killer then your own government...

Their is a HUGE difference in attitudes towards this with the UK and the US, and you ARE essentially going to be comfortable with peodophiles rings and terrorists using the same services you are, it's a fact, but you don't want laws in place to catch them and you'd rather those types of people had the same protection as you do...

I mean you lot go nuclear mental at the mere thought of a Police officer having the right to force you to use your finger and unlock your phone... ignoring the fact they would have to have probable cause to make you do that in the first place....
Terrorists etc can drive in cars, let's ban cars...? Terrorists etc also breath air, let's ban air so that they can't breathe...? Where does it end?

The problem you seem to miss, along with many politicians, is you can't filter the innocent people and bad guys when it comes to strong, secure encryption. We either all have it, or no-one does. And on balance, it's better that we have it than we don't, because luckily the innocent many outnumber the small number of bad guys.

I want laws in place to catch the bad guys you mention, but not laws that turn the world into an ineffective fascist police state where those bad guys would still get away with stuff anyway but the innocent are unprotected from not only those bad guys but other bad guys we currently have some measure of protection against!!

To put it another way, yes I'd rather have encryption that can stop a lot of fraud, ID theft, domestic violence, bullying, intimidation, economic damage, wars(!), corruption... even if that means it's harder to track down the portion of terrorists and pedophiles who also use encryption.

Because the alternative is you try to catch more terrorists and pedophiles by compromising encryption, but they would surely just use other methods of communication (offline/alternate encryption that isn't back-doored), and meanwhile you've opened up everyone who uses the internet to greater risk of fraud, ID theft, domestic violence, bullying, intimidation, economic damage, wars and corruption. So why do that?

Any sane, humane person wants to stop terrorists and pedophiles from committing their horrible acts. But it's far from clear that having backdoors in encryption (whether just communications or more widely) would achieve that. I'd say it would potentially actually do the opposite, and make it less likely we catch such people. All the while making many other crimes more likely.

And it's not about not trusting the government in an ethical sense - more that even if you trust them to be doing it with good intentions, if they have access to backdoors etc, then sooner or later that access would leak to... guess who? Your proverbial terrorists and pedophiles, along with everyone else who could misuse such access.
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Top Stories

apple california streaming event

Apple Event Announced: 'California Streaming' on September 14 With iPhone 13, Apple Watch Series 7 Expected

Tuesday September 7, 2021 9:03 am PDT by
Apple today announced that it will be holding a special event on Tuesday, September 14 at 10:00 a.m. The event will take place at the Steve Jobs Theater on the Apple Park campus in Cupertino, California. As with WWDC and last year's fall events, this new event will be held digitally with no members of the media invited to attend in person. Apple will likely provide pre-taped segments for...
Apple Prefer Lightning Over USB C Feature

iPhone Sticking With Lightning Port Over USB-C for 'Foreseeable Future'

Tuesday March 2, 2021 9:32 am PST by
Apple will retain the Lightning connector on the iPhone for the "foreseeable future," with no intention of switching to USB-C, according to reliable analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. In spite of much of the industry moving toward USB-C, Apple will not be using it to replace the Lightning connector on the iPhone 13, or indeed on any iPhone model for the time being. In a note seen by MacRumors yesterday,...
youtube apple tv

YouTube Discontinuing 3rd-Generation Apple TV App, AirPlay Still Available

Wednesday February 3, 2021 3:09 pm PST by
YouTube is planning to stop supporting its YouTube app on the third-generation Apple TV models, where YouTube has long been available as a channel option. A 9to5Mac reader received a message about the upcoming app discontinuation, which is set to take place in March.Starting early March, the YouTube app will no longer be available on Apple TV (3rd generation). You can still watch YouTube on...
original iphone

Phil Schiller Says iPhone Was 'Earth-Shattering' Ten Years Ago and Remains 'Unmatched' Today

Monday January 9, 2017 7:15 am PST by
To commemorate the tenth anniversary of the iPhone, Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller sat down with tech journalist Steven Levy for a wide-ranging interview about the smartphone's past, present, and future. The report first reflects upon the iPhone's lack of support for third-party apps in its first year. The argument inside Apple was split between whether the iPhone should be a closed...
iOS 15 icon on phone

Apple Seeds Sixth Betas of iOS and iPadOS 15 to Developers

Tuesday August 17, 2021 10:05 am PDT by
Apple today seeded the sixth betas of iOS and iPadOS 15 to developers for testing purposes, with the updates coming one week after Apple released the fifth betas. Registered developers can download the profile for the iOS and iPadOS betas from the Apple Developer Center, and once the profile is installed, beta updates will be available over the air. iOS 15 is a major update that...
maroon5memories

Apple Collaborates With Maroon 5 to Add 'Memories' Song to Photos App

Wednesday September 25, 2019 12:02 pm PDT by
Apple has teamed up with Maroon 5 to add the group's new song "Memories" to the Memories feature in the Photos app, allowing it to be used for photo slide show creations, reports Billboard. "Memories" will be available as a soundtrack option for a limited time and it is available to iPhone and iPad users running the latest iOS 13 and iPadOS software. Memories in the Photos app are created ...
it home ecommerce app iphone 13

iPhone 13 to Launch on September 17, AirPods 3 on September 30, Claims Report

Wednesday August 25, 2021 2:42 am PDT by
Apple may be planning to launch the iPhone 13 on Friday, September 17 and third-generation AirPods on Thursday, September 30, according to an image of an e-commerce app discovered by Chinese language site IT Home. The screenshot, originally posted by Weibo account @PandaIsBald, suggests all four iPhone 13 models will go on sale on September 17, followed by the AirPods 3 on September 30....
MacBook Pro Coating

Apple Launches Quality Program for MacBook Pro Anti-Reflective Coating Issues

Saturday October 17, 2015 7:58 am PDT by
Apple has issued an internal notice about a new Quality Program that addresses anti-reflective coating issues on MacBook and MacBook Pro models with Retina displays, as confirmed by multiple sources. These issues include the anti-reflective coating on displays wearing off or delaminating under certain circumstances. Apple will replace Retina displays on affected MacBook or MacBook Pro models ...
iPhone 13 Dummy Thumbnail 2

Full iPhone 13 Feature Breakdown: Everything Rumors Say We Can Expect

Tuesday August 31, 2021 7:50 am PDT by
With the launch of Apple's iPhone 13 lineup believed to be just a few weeks away, we have compiled all of the coherent rumors from our coverage over the past year to build a full picture of the features and upgrades coming to the company's new smartphones. For clarity, only explicit improvements, upgrades, and new features compared to the iPhone 12 lineup are listed. It is worth noting that...
iphone 12 colors 2021

iPhone 12 Colors: Deciding on The Right Color

Thursday November 5, 2020 8:35 am PST by
The iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Pro arrived in October 2020 in a range of color options, with entirely new hues available on both devices, as well as some popular classics. The 12 and 12 Pro have different color choices, so if you have your heart set on a particular shade, you might not be able to get your preferred model in that color. iPhone 12 mini and iPhone 12 The iPhone 12 mini and iPhone...