U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron has been weatheringa Twitter storm of mockery for comments he made yesterday in which he appeared to suggestitwould be the intention of a future Conservative government to ban strong encryption. <\/p>\n
Are we going to allow a means of communication between people which even in extremis, with a signed warrant from the Home Secretary personally, that we cannot read? he said in a public speech. No we must not. The first duty of any government is to keep our country and our people safe. <\/p>\n
Internet security experts chipped in en masse on social media to point out thepyrrhic folly of Cameronthinking hecan banencryption, while others noted the heightened hypocrisy of a politician using last weeks terrorattacks in Paris as a foil to attempt to undermine citizens digital privacy rights at home. <\/p>\n
TechCrunch understands alarm at the potential implications of Cameronscomments evenextended to the U.K.s VC investment community which makes sense, given that Internetbusinesseswouldnt be able to function without encryption. So in a move that will shock precisely no one, theback channel back-peddling has begun. <\/p>\n
Downing Street sources saidthe PMs words had been misinterpreted, and that he was not, in fact, singling outencryption, or any particular Internet companies, for a ban.Although another governmentsourcedeclined to confirm to TechCrunch that a future Conservative government would not be seeking to ban encryption when we asked directly.So the Tories are evidently not committing to endingall encryption-banning rhetorical outbursts in future. <\/p>\n
The game being played here is not just with popular opinion on the election campaign trail ahead of the U.K.s General Election thisMay, as the Toriescack-handedlytry to capitalize on fear of terrorism by tilting at digital windmills. Its also an attempt to apply politicalpressure on foreign ownedInternet companies to provideU.K. security services with backdoors intotheir services. <\/p>\n
Last Novemberthe incominghead of the U.K.s GCHQ spy agency madea direct public appeal to U.S. Internet companies to co-operate with government counter terrorism efforts and hand over data on users when asked. <\/p>\n
Yesterday Cameron was evidently trying to speed that same plough. However if, as government sources are (sort of)suggesting, he does not in fact have an intention to ban encryption, but is hoping that Internet companies will agree to put backdoors into services themselves, there are undoubtedly some digital services that U.K. spookswill not be able to peek into i.e. those that use end-to-end encryption or companies thatrefuse to co-operate with requests to installbackdoors and, really, there is not a whole lotU.K. politicianswillbe able to do about that. <\/p>\n
That said,the Prime Ministerhas previously committed a future Tory government to re-introducemore comprehensivepowers of digital comms data capture, and to extend the emergency surveillancelegislation (DRIPA)that was rushed through the U.K. parliament last year. Under DRIPA,companies providing a service to the U.K. are technically required to provide access to data. <\/p>\n
The difficulty(for government) comes in trying to enforce such a legal requirement if a company does not have a physical presence in the U.K.And even where a company does have a presence, no U.K. government is going to wantto be seen banning mainstream apps. Thats nevera good look unless youre heading upa totalitarian regime. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n