Comment by negus
15 days ago
Not surprised, considering UK's ridiculous key disclosure law (United Kingdom The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), Part III, activated by ministerial order in October 2007, requires persons to decrypt information and/or supply keys to government representatives to decrypt information without a court order.) that makes anyone with high-entropy random data (which is undistinguishable from the crypto-container) a criminal for "not providing the keys to decrypt"
This is the way that the UK has passed laws for a while now, make them so broad that they potentially criminalise everyone, then selectively prosecute. This is a very obvious setup for future totalitarianism. I’m surprised that the British public stands for it, but I guess they must not care.
People here are very passive and used to being pulled around. It's insane how far people's rights have eroded already. No right to protest, no right for privacy - what's next on the chopping block?
The impression I have is that (some) people in the UK protest but are ignored, vilified, or punished for it. And then nothing changes.
The last time I wrote to my MP, I got a form letter back basically saying "Don't bother contacting us, only The Party matters". (I mean, those weren't the words at all; but having had lame-but-bespoke messages back from them in the past, this was a noticeable and disheartening change).
No right to own money. That will be taken away when cash is phased out.
No right to be mean on social media, too.
2 replies →
Future totalitarianism? Is the UK's government restricted in anyway right now? What line have they not crossed yet?
As far as I know they haven’t started murdering political opponents yet, so that’s something. But I take your point, the UK is today not a serious country for a variety of reasons.
3 replies →
This is fuelled by notion that law enforcement is incompetent and doesn't work.
If law enforcement won't catch criminal even if you had them all the details, evidence, witnesses, then average person thinks there laws are dead anyway as there is no one competent to enforce them.
> I’m surprised that the British public stands for it, but I guess they must not care.
I can educate people but it always comes back to "I've not got anything to hide". What are we suppose to do, go out to the streets and protest? Start a petition, right to a PM who has no idea what encryption is?
Mentioning Linux to my family opens a can of worms. We are naive to think protesting actually changes something, it's old fashion. Those with power just don't care so unless people attack with their wallets nothing will come from.
It's not 1995 so unless you have £ for lobbying surrounded by people in suites there is nothing public of any nation can do against anyone in power.
They have this power precisely because you have given up. Government power is derived from the consent of the goverened. Collective action does work and always will, but it needs to be coordinated. If enough people in the UK stopped going to work, they could affect change pretty quickly I reckon.
1 reply →
Don’t you think maybe this attitude is part of the problem?
9 replies →
I'm not surprised at all
Brit here. Yeah from my experience people don't care. Hardly anyone gets prosecuted and those who do have often done something bad.
Most day to day complaints are they don't prosecute enough, often related to the bastard that snatched your phone. We have approximately zero people sitting in jail for failing to decrypt and similar.
>This is a very obvious setup for future totalitarianism.
No it really isn't. If they are planning a totalitarian takeover they are being very sneaky about it. There is a strong anti totalitarianism tradition here including elections since 1265, writing books like 1984 and bombing nazis.
Brit here.
> Hardly anyone gets prosecuted and those who do have often done something bad.
Perhaps often they've done something bad, but sometimes they haven't, that's the point. Obviously this is wrong and you shouldn't be so passive about it.
> If they are planning a totalitarian takeover they are being very sneaky about it. There is a strong anti totalitarianism tradition here including elections since 1265, writing books like 1984 and bombing nazis.
I'd argue people in the UK today like to adopt the label of being anti-authoritarian and anti-totalitarian, but in reality most people here, including our politicians, quite like authoritarianism.
For example, people here often argue things like "I support free speech, but obviously insulting someone for their identity is wrong". So in the UK we apparently have free speech and I can apparently criticise religious people, but at the same time just this week someone in the UK was arrested for burning a bible.
You see this hypocrisy constantly in the UK... "I'm not an authoritarian, but smoking is bad". "I'm not an authoritarian, but you can't be saying that". "I'm not an authoritarian, but if you're worried about mass surveillance you probably have something to hide". "I"m not authoritarian, but you can't just let people have private data on an encrypted device which the government can't access".
The UK is very authoritarian these days, but unlike other parts of the world people here deny it while arguing in favour of more of it.
There's nothing necessarily wrong with being authoritarian and wanting the government to have more control either. Clearly many countries find this type of government appealing, but lets at least be honest about it. We don't want kids on social media. We don't want people smoking. We don't want people being about to call people names on Twitter. We don't want people burning religious texts. We don't want people being free from government surveillance.
2 replies →
Today, maybe, even so it probably depends on who you ask.
The thing about giving your rights away is that it’s very difficult to get them back, and you never know who “they” are going to be in the future.
1 reply →
Plenty of people have been jailed in the uk for not providing pins or passwords.
I've tried to explain the issues with the UK government's stance on digital privacy to my friends. The responses I get:
* I have nothing to hide, I don't care
* Oh come on, our government doesn't care what I'm up to
* The UK will never be totalitarian. I'm not scared of the government
* The UK civil service is incompetent and could never pull this off (fair point, although I worry about the safety of my personal data in the hands of such people)
Let's not forget we had a hard-left (Corbyn) socialist regime come close to power, whose cabinet members called for "direct action" against political opponents, just a few years ago.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/watch-john-mcdonnell-s-c...
I don't think people realise how quickly things could go wrong with these surveillance mechanisms in place, and spiteful, authoritarian politicians taking power.
> and spiteful, authoritarian politicians taking power.
Or spiteful, authoritarian non-politicians taking power, spreading misinformation, and censoring free speech:
https://www.techdirt.com/2025/02/03/musk-shows-us-what-actua...
8 replies →
It seems like perfect case to make multi-container encryption as default. That is different data will be revealed using different key and there is no way of knowing how many containers there are in the blob of data and not possible to prove someone is hiding a key.
Not if the state can access your super secret containers while you access them with your software. Because state backdoor either in hardware or in OS level
You could try but you might find it/you get "disappeared" like Truecrypt.
It's incumbent on the prosecution to prove that you know the key they are claiming you are withholding. It is a defence to say you forgot it, or that the data is random. The prosecution would have to prove that you didn't forget it and that the data is not random.
In most cases it requires a court order as well.
> It is a defence to say you forgot it,
Do you have a source for that assertion?
It's only an offence if you "knowingly fail" to provide it - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/53
s3 makes it clear that if you plausibly claim you have forgotten it, then the prosecution must prove this is not the case (i.e. you still know it) beyond reasonable doubt.