• Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    No, there’s no such thing as breaking encryption, they’re trying to outlaw, or require back doors for strong encryption. Outside of a quantum computing miracle expansion, there’s no breaking strong encryption.

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      require back doors for strong encryption

      That’s what the headline implies. Encryption is useless if a third party can decrypt it.

      • sudoshakes@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        His point, which seems pedantic, but isn’t, is to illustrate the specific attack vector.

        Breaking encryption would mean that the cryptographic process is something that an attacker can directly exploit. This is as close to impossible as it gets in that line of work.

        While you can compromise the effectiveness of encryption by subverting it using other attack vectors like man in the middle or phishing or the good old fashioned physical device access, these don’t break the algorithm used in a way that it makes it vulnerable to decrypting other data.

        None of those mean an algorithm used like say the ole Two fish encryption is “broken”.

        Blowfish Triple DES Twofish RC4 Etc. All are fine and not currently broken. All however cannot protect your data if some other attack vector companies you or your site’s security.

    • Facebones@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      8 months ago

      Basically nothing being done “for the children” is ever actually “for the children.” It’s just an emotional life hack to do whatever you want and call anybody who calls you on it a pedo.

      I know I’m mostly preaching to the choir here but oh well.

      • XTL@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Any sane country should make a “for the children” or other bs justifications in law or policy proposals immediately punishable.

  • folkrav@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    8 months ago

    Facebook, Google et al. literally just said “fuck it” and stopped serving news content to Canadian and Australian users when they tried legislating around it. I’m curious if UK users won’t just get geoblocked out of many major services lol

    • sarchar@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      The owner these companies are apparently liable for correctly policing content on their platform. If they fail, they face jail time. That’s certainly not a risk I’d be comfortable with, so I sure as hell would gtfo too.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    This is their stated intention, but there are a bunch of idiots, and even they know it won’t work.

    So this will probably end up getting quietly walked back to avoid yet another embarrassing scandal of governmental uselessness, and you’ll never hear about it again. They are currently getting absolutely rinsed in the enquiry, so hopefully they’re feeling a little bit humble at the moment.

    • zzzzz@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      Maybe it’ll be used like “no loitering” laws. Often not enforced, but useful when you don’t like something and can call it illegal.

      • The Doctor@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        ref, USian “pretext laws.” Trying to pay for something with defaced currency comes immediately to mind.