Although the UK government has said that it now won’t force unproven technology on tech companies, […] the controversial clauses remain within the legislation, which is still likely to pass into law.

the continued existence of the powers within the law means encryption-breaking surveillance could still be introduced in the future.

So all ‘until it’s technically feasible’ means is opening the door to scanning in future rather than scanning today. It’s not a change

The implications of the British government backing down, even partially, will reverberate far beyond the UK

“It’s huge in terms of arresting the type of permissive international precedent that this would set […]. The UK was the first jurisdiction to be pushing this kind of mass surveillance. It stops that momentum. And that’s huge for the world.”

  • Saki@monero.townOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fedi (at least Mastodon) private messages are not yet even e2e to begin with. PGP can be a solution, except ~20 years ago, there was also a complicated situation about it. Also, iirc there was a “key escrow” debate, which seems to have been essentially the same problem (the user is required to provide a backdoor to the gov).