• ADTJ@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    The bill was changed so it no longer bans e2e encryption, it’s now the responsibility of tech companies to provide protection “where technically feasible” which basically means fuck all

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      where technically feasible

      It gives something that can be argued about later, right? After other parts of the bill have begun to be implemented. So, further down the road if gvmt considers e.g. WhatsApp or Signal as having CSAM and not taking appropriate steps, then they can put pressure and WA/Signal can argue back about feasibility and merit.

      • sic_1@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Does that mean that when you’re sitting on a bench in the middle of a city, you could in theory snoop the passwords and banking details in clear text from the WiFi networks around you?