Hope you've updated your browser since mid 2015. That's when they patched a problem with the government's attempt to backdoor SSL in the 90s. You could MITM and force the browser to receive a weaker form of encryption without the browser or server knowing, then crack the weak 90s crypto.
This security hole has been around for decades, and I need to tell you exactly what it means: It meant that any HTTPS connection in the last 10 years could be MITM'd by anyone.
I wish this anti-encryption movement would die already. David Cameron is talking out of his tech-illiterate arse, nobody is going to outlaw encryption to save "muh children" or backdoor popular encryption because it's a fucking stupid thing to do.
He's simply using it to gain political momentum that appeals to the older, more tech-illiterate masses, because that's the Tory's target demographic; Old, scared, middle class filth that doesn't understand how technology works.
>>52415529 Fear-mongering is a global tactic used by politicians. It's all hot air because governments won't want to further piss off big business. Imagine if they simply started legally requiring data collection? Imagine the implications that will have for large businesses that deal with lots of user data, they'd have to spend millions to push agenda that they don't want to enforce, and alienate their customers doing it, it will never happen.
Look at the attitudes that big businesses have towards this "issue":
>>52415850 >Yeah those companies never sold out to the NSA. You don't understand how the NSA works. You either give data to the NSA, or they take it. Apple is going the "let's make it so they can't take it" route, and google is saying the same thing. Whether they do or not is another issue. Google seemed to be annoyed that the NSA was taking their data, my theory is that they were annoyed because they were taking the data 'without paying'.
In the event the draft bill passes, I shall not be moved. The internet is for all humanity. I will continue to develop and ship strong end-to-end encryption as if it hadn't passed, and Cameron and May can shove it up their pig-fucking, horse-faced arses if they don't like it. I have taken legal advice: if they ever served me with a warrant under the current IP Bill draft, it would be invalid and I would therefore openly publish it and mock it.
Backdoors are technologically infeasible to operate safely, utterly indefensible, and seek to undermine our freedom of opinion and the trust underpinning our modern digital world. I have said as much in the PMQs and in evidence before the committee, and I stand by that conviction.
Thread replies: 19 Thread images: 1
Thread DB ID: 424555
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.