Meredith Whittaker is leading the US-dominated tech industry's latest campaign to thwart the internet safety bill. Credit: Horacio Villalobos/Getty Images Europe < p>Officials cannot be trusted to protect online privacy, the chief executive of messaging app Signal warned, fearing the new bill would give Whitehall unprecedented surveillance powers.
Meredith Whittaker has warned that the Internet Safety Act, about to pass its final stages in Parliament, will give television and IT industry regulators the power to read people's private messages at will.
«It would be dangerous . move to the UK,” she said. «We cannot continue to offer truly confidential communication services and undermine or falsify our encryption.»
Whittaker is leading the US-dominated tech industry's latest push to stave off new rules. Her views are shared by the likes of WhatsApp, which has pledged to leave the UK if the Internet Safety Act becomes law as it stands.
Signal itself is a relatively small player, boasting 125 million downloads compared to $2 billion WhatsApp users.
However, Signal's encryption technology is at the heart of Meta's messaging app, making the proposed new laws an equal threat to both.
The global controversy has engulfed the government's flagship internet security bill. over what the tech bosses say is unprecedented new powers for Ofcom, the TV and radio regulator.
Michel Donelan, technology secretary, wants Ofcom to expand its powers as the UK's internet regulator, and is ready to give him new broad rights to scrutinize the inner workings of technology companies.
Michelle Donelan, Minister of Culture, has passed amendments to the Internet Safety Bill. Credit: Daniel Leal/AFP
Under these plans, Ofcom will be able to force tech companies to install «accredited software» to scan terrorism and child abuse messages on services like Signal, WhatsApp and Apple's iMessage.
The government says this type of bulk-scanning software is safe and won't violate anyone's privacy.
Technology advocates like Whittaker, a former Google senior manager and now President of Signal, strongly disagree.< /p>
“So there is some confusion at the heart of this debate,” the American said, “because what we hear from people [supporting Ofcom’s new powers] is that they agree with our arguments, they understand that there is no such thing as a secure backdoor and that encryption is a fundamental technology for securing and protecting digital infrastructure.»
«But when it comes to clerical advice to make this set of basic facts clear in the text of the bill, there is some source of hesitation that I don't understand . I don't know how to square this circle.
The current debate over the bill has come to a head as technology advocates, children's rights activists and even sitting government ministers hurl heated accusations at each other.
Security Minister Tom Tugendhat said in May that Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg cared more about their company's «huge profits» from children than «protecting them from dangers on their own [Meta] platform.»
Some on the technical side of the fence have privately described the internet safety bill as «stupid ” and “incomprehensible”, attacking both ministers and officials.
Tugendhat's very personal public outburst prompted Kiaran Martin, founder of GCHQ's National Cybersecurity Center, to intervene and call for an end to such «unfounded» accusations.
Tom Tugendhat says Facebook and Instagram's new privacy measures will put children at risk of abuse. Photo: Danny Lawson/PA
However, morals remained heated. Just this week, Whittaker felt like asking former minister Damian Collins, MP, author of the Internet Security Bill, if he accused her of lying during a televised debate about encrypted messages.
“What interested me? is that he agreed that it was important not to break the encryption,” she said.
“[Collins] has even mentioned that he is a Signal user himself. But when I brought up the subject of amending the bill to make it clear that we weren't going to break the encryption… He consistently fought back and said, «No, it's not possible, just trust us.»
Whittaker adds: «For us it would be irresponsible to simply trust the words of the man in the green room of the TV studio when the stakes are so high in the UK and around the world.”
At the heart of her objection to Ofcom's new powers in the bill is the ability of government officials to read users' encrypted communications.
Tech companies say their end-to-end encryption technology cannot have loopholes for government access because that would allow hostile foreign powers such as Russia and China to break into the system as well.
Due to the fact that the most intimate UK government cases are pending over WhatsApp, as revealed in The Telegraph Lockdown Files investigation, critics are quick to point out the risks of allowing Vladimir Putin to read Whitehall conversations in real time.
Nevertheless. Ministers are indifferent to this danger, Whittaker said.
«Encryption either works or it breaks,» she said. «If the British police can get in, hackers can get in, hostile states can get in.»
On the other hand, the government, public sector bodies and charities say encryption technology is also being used by terrorists and child abusers, to hide from law enforcement.
Officials are keen to fight online crime, and ministers want to fulfill their manifesto promise to make the UK «the safest place in the world to access online».
Last year, the Internet Watch Foundation, a child protection charity, received 375,230 reports of child abuse, up 4 percent from 2021. Of these messages, more than a quarter of a million contained or promoted illegal images.
Third. studies show kids are lying about their age on social media
Rob Jones, senior director of the National Crime Agency, said in April that «the ongoing deployment of privacy-enhancing technologies, such as end-to-end encryption, is something that has been highlighted by violent child abuse online will be turned off.”
“This understanding, day by day, leads to the fact that children are rescued, and people involved in child abuse are arrested,” he added.
A government spokesman said: “We are unequivocally committed to innovation and privacy, however we have made it clear that companies should only implement end-to-end encryption if they can simultaneously prevent heinous child sexual abuse on their platforms.
The spokesperson insisted that the internet security bill «will not give Ofcom or the government any authority to monitor users' private communications,» adding: «As a last resort, and only after Ofcom's strict privacy protections, instruct companies to either use or every effort to develop or obtain technology to detect and remove illegal child sexual abuse content.” withdraw its services from the UK or accept a ban.
Last week, Apple called on the government to «amend the [Internet Security Act] to protect strong end-to-end encryption for the benefit of all.»
WhatsApp chief Will Cathcart told The Telegraph in December that the ubiquitous messaging app would rather leave the UK than comply with proposed new laws.
Signal will set up proxy servers, similar to how it evades official bans in Iran and China to allow UK users to report on the use of the app once the Internet Safety Act becomes law, Whittaker says.
«We will never leave the UK voluntarily,» she said.
«Everyone in the world, including people in Iran, people in China, people in North Korea and people in the UK deserve the human rights of privacy and free speech and deserve to be safe when using online services» , she concludes.
The rumor of Britain being mentioned in the same breath as authoritarian states with a track record of executing dissidents is annoying and perhaps exaggerated. a compromise must be found.
Свежие комментарии