by boyce on 11/30/16, 10:16 AM
I live in the UK and the thing that's disturbed me most about all this is how little coverage there's been and how little outrage there is about the consequences of this law. I genuinely think as a country we've given up. There's no enthusiasm for any cause and no one has any will left to stand up for the things they ought to care about. It's a weird atmosphere here now.
by doc_holliday on 11/30/16, 10:11 AM
Having attempted to read the legislation passed, I actually have no idea in a lot of ways what this bill does and what this bill doesn't cover. (The main thread of what it covers seems terrible).
I consider myself a quite intelligent and logical person, but I get lost halfway through reading it. It seems full of contradictions and half vague statements that could or couldn't cover something.
Are these bills purposefully confusing by design? It seems like you can interpret it in a lot of ways. Why is it not clear, concise and understandable?
by sir-alien on 11/30/16, 11:11 AM
I do find such a law quite strange though. The intention (at least for public consumption) was to help "prevent" terrorism. Not sure how the NHS or health services seeing your browser history will do that.
France already has a similar law in place so I wonder how that worked out for them by preventing the Bataclan massacre. (it didn't)
This law will probably not help in any shape or form to prevent terrorism but was merely implemented to provide some form of leverage over people.
"Do as we say or this lovely data becomes public, or you are denied healthcare because of a site you visited but never visited because it was a hidden iframe"
by junto on 11/30/16, 12:30 PM
It is curious to note that if you very slowly and gradually reduce the size of the sheep pen, as long as the sheep are still fed, they won't notice until they are driven down the tunnel to the slaughter house.
It is not until they hear the captive bolt being shot through the skull of the sheep in front of them, that they finally start to panic.
by brassic on 11/30/16, 11:37 AM
This is basically national security letters with oversight. Which is part of the problem. When any of the major democracies introduces a law like this, it normalises it for the rest. Which then gives encouragement to the more oppressive countries. The whole world seems to be in a race to the bottom.
by rahrahrah on 11/30/16, 11:09 AM
I would like the crypto-experts of HN to help understand what consequences this has. For example, I have whatsapp with E2E encryption. Can the government read my texts now?
by mcherm on 11/30/16, 12:56 PM
OK, time to stop using any security software created by company under UK jurisdiction. Anyone want to help make a list?
by juanre on 11/30/16, 12:59 PM
I would like to attain some decent level of privacy, but my searches on how to go about it yield a large amount of conflicting information (which I suspect is there on purpose.) Is there a sensible guide out there that some of the experts at HN would recommend?
by vorotato on 11/30/16, 8:09 PM
UK is going to get hacked into oblivion once the key gets leaked, and it will get leaked. "Hey lets cripple national security under a single point of failure in the name of security".
by rurban on 11/30/16, 11:17 AM
So the UK just killed their ISP and hosting industry. Welcome in Germany
by reddavis on 11/30/16, 10:41 AM
by Chris2048 on 11/30/16, 12:24 PM
What technical solutions can be used to prevent this? As I understand, this mainly entails internet access logs? Would a secure, off-shore VPN defeat this?
by antouank on 11/30/16, 10:41 AM
> "There may be not much point using a VPN to conceal your web activities if it can be blown open by a technical capability notice."
If my computer makes a VPN connection with a machine outside of the UK, is the above claim still valid?