• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

David Cameron seeks cooperation of US president over encryption crackdown

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nokterian

Member
David Cameron is to urge Barack Obama to pressure internet firms such as Twitter and Facebook to do more to cooperate with Britain’s intelligence agencies as they seek to track the online activities of Islamist extremists.

As he becomes the first European leader to meet the president after the multiple shootings in Paris last week, the prime minister will seek to win Obama’s support for his plans to secure a new legal framework to deny terrorists a “safe space”.

The prime minister arrives after he proposed earlier this week that British intelligence agencies have the power to break the encrypted communications of suspected terrorists and insisting that the likes of Twitter and Facebook do more to cooperate with Britain’s GCHQ eavesdropping centre.

Cameron will demand that US internet companies store – and then be prepared to hand over – data and content needed by the intelligence agencies “to keep us safe” when he meets the president for talks in the Oval Office on Friday morning.

A government source said: “The prime minister’s objective here is to get the US companies to cooperate with us more, to make sure that our intelligence agencies get the information they need to keep us safe. That will be his approach in the discussion with President Obama – how can we work together to get them to cooperate more, what is the best approach to encourage them to do more.”

Obama, who recently accused North Korea of orchestrating the cyber attack on the film studio Sony Pictures, is due to address data security in his penultimate state of the union address next week.

The sought-after summit meeting is Cameron’s last bilateral visit overseas before the general election. The prime minister arrives on Thursday, and is due to first meet the president for dinner at the White House.

The two-day visit, designed originally by Downing Street to provide helpful general election pictures to burnish Cameron’s status a world statesman, will take on a more sober note than planned in the aftermath of the attacks in Paris. The White House believes it erred in failing to send a high-level representative to the Unity rally in Paris on Sunday attended by Cameron and other EU leaders.

In a sign that Obama is prepared to go out of his way to help the prime minister on the eve of the general election, the two men have penned a joint article in which the two leaders declare that transatlantic freedoms are “rooted in economic strength”.

Echoing one of the Tories’ central themes of the general election – that progressive goals, such as defending the NHS, cannot be achieved without a sound economy – Cameron and Obama write in the Times on Thursday: “As we meet today at the White House, we reaffirm our belief that our ability to defend our freedoms is rooted in our economic strength, and the values that we cherish – freedom of expression, the rule of law, and strong democratic institutions.”

The intervention by Obama, who also endorses Cameron’s plans to expand the number of apprenticeships and to increase the minimum wage, will come as a blow to Ed Miliband, the leader of the Democrats’ sister party in the UK. But the Labour leader, who met Obama in the White House last summer in a more low key setting, has been told that the president was unamused by his decision not to support Cameron in the House of Commons vote on military action in Syria in August 2013.

While in Washington, the prime minister will:

• Press the president to allow Shaker Aamer, the last British resident held at Guantánamo Bay, to be released and sent to Britain. Officials fear that Aamer, a British resident who was born in Saudi Arabia and who has been held at the US base since 2002, will not be safe if the US carries out a plan to deport him to Saudi Arabia.

• Announce business deals worth more than £1.1bn including an injection of £600m in equity capital by the Carlyle Group into the North Sea oil and gas industry.

British government officials say that the prime minister’s plan to provide a fresh legal framework for the collection of communications data – such as billing information – and the interception of the contents of communications can only work with the co-operation of internet giants that are largely based in the US.

Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the former British ambassador to Washington who has been appointed as a special envoy to the internet companies, is due to report by the end of March.

But a government source indicated that the prime minister believes that the internet giants need to do more now – a process that could be encouraged by Obama.

Obama has faced intense pressure from the internet giants over the intrusive surveillance of the US National Security Agency exposed by the files leaked by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, wrote on his Facebook page last year that he was “confused and frustrated by the repeated reports of the behaviour of the US government”.

The president announced a series of initiatives on Monday, before his state of the union address, to improve the data security of US citizens. A new student digital privacy act is designed to stop companies from selling student data to third parties.

Theresa May, the home secretary, told MPs that there must be no safe spaces for terrorist communications was likely that the counter-terrorist investigation in Paris following the massacre at Charlie Hebdo involved the use of communications data to locate the suspects. The home secretary mounted another fierce attack on her coalition colleagues for blocking the communications data bill – the so called ‘snoopers charter’ – in 2012, saying: “With every day that passes without the capabilities in the proposed bill, the powers of the security services diminish.” She said this meant “crimes will go unpunished and innocent lives put at risk”.

She said it was necessary to allow the police and the security services, under a tightly controlled regime, to find out “the who, where, when and how of a communication, but not its content”.

The prime minister will use the White House talks to press the case for the release to Britain of Shaker Aamer who has not been charged with any offence despite being incarcerated in Guantánamo Bay since 2002 after being picked up in Afghanistan in 2001 where he said he was working for a charity.

Cameron, who raised the case of Shaker Aamer at the G8 summit in Lough Erne in 2013, is keen to secure the release of the detainee to avoid him being sent to Saudi Arabia. Officials point out that the UK has taken 14 Guantánamo detainees compared with 11 across the rest of the EU.

“This is an important case for the prime minister and he would like to see progress on it as quickly as possible,” the government source said. “The opportunity that this presents, in terms of Shaker Aamer’s case, is for the prime minister to sit down face to face with President Obama and talk to him about it and talk to him about it and understand where the US is at.”

However, the prime minister does not expect a breakthrough on Aamer during this trip. He appreciates he needs to make the case with care because the US Congress has to be given 30 days’ notice of any release from Guantánamo.

Congress could also disrupt Obama’s plans to close the Guantánamo Bay detention centre by the end of his second term if a release plays badly in the US.

It is understood that Britain has been unable to provide the US authorities with assurances that it would have a legal basis for monitoring Aamer on his return to the UK.


http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...bama-help-tracking-islamist-extremists-online

Freedom of Speech? This guy is insane unbelievable.
 

esms

Member
Cameron will demand that US internet companies store – and then be prepared to hand over – data and content needed by the intelligence agencies “to keep us safe” when he meets the president for talks in the Oval Office on Friday morning.

HAHAHAHAHA. Oh god, the fact that keep us safe is in quotes is killing me.
 
Holy shit, this guy has seized on and is trying to exploit the Paris attacks like a dog with a bone or a cat who is seeking revenge on the oven mitt wearing twat who wouldn't leave well enough alone.

Crazy that no-one is calling him out on this.
 

lazygecko

Member
What is it about Britain's government and legislation specifically being so sincerely in favor of having an Orwellian surveilance society? It's like they are completely aloof to the implications that have been very visible in debates, fiction (it can't be a coincidence that a lot of thes classic fictional works come from or are set in Britain in the first place) etc for decades. Is this some cultural thing or are the "elite" really that stuck in a bubble?
 

Zaph

Member
Tim Cook has publicly stated that the change to iMessage encryption means, even with a warrant, they have no useful information to hand over to law enforcement.

I don't see ol' Dave's trip across the pond making them change this.

What is it about Britain's government and legislation specifically being so sincerely in favor of having an Orwellian surveilance society? It's like they are completely aloof to the implications that have been very visible in debates, fiction (it can't be a coincidence that a lot of thes classic fictional works come from or are set in Britain in the first place) etc for decades. Is this some cultural thing or are the "elite" really that stuck in a bubble?
It's not the British government - it's British voters. Unlike countries such as France and Germany, there's no real unified demand for privacy and liberty. The arguement keeps coming back to the same bullshit "If you've got nothing to hide, what's the problem?".

All it takes is one tabloid talking about the evil terrorists coming to get us all and large swaths of the voting public are happy to sign over whatever rights. Similar thing with recent porn laws.
 

slit

Member
Cameron will demand that US internet companies store – and then be prepared to hand over – data and content needed by the intelligence agencies “to keep us safe” when he meets the president for talks in the Oval Office on Friday morning. A government source said: “The prime minister’s objective here is to get the US companies to cooperate with us more, to make sure that our intelligence agencies get the information they need to keep us safe. That will be his approach in the discussion with President Obama – how can we work together to get them to cooperate more, what is the best approach to encourage them to do more.

O Rly?

How about we just give him the finger instead?
 

Somnid

Member
The silver lining is dumb Americans who might have been for it when the FBI director was crying about it might be dumb enough to distance themselves solely because Europe wants it.
 

Sapiens

Member
This just inspires me to get into the security game and work on creating better encryption.

What a fucking twit.
 
He's insane, they're going to turn the Internet into "The Legacy System From Hell That Holds Civilisation Hostage", make it super unsafe security wise to do anything on, while still having it be required to do anything in daily life.
 

Hari Seldon

Member
Jesus fucking christ. UK gafbros you need to boot this fucker out. He is going to wormtounge Obama into this shit I know it.
 
Tim Cook has publicly stated that he change to iMessage encryption means, even with a warrant, they have no useful information to hand over to law enforcement.

I don't see ol' Dave's trip across the pond making them change this.


It's not the British government - it's British voters. Unlike countries such as France and Germany, there's no real unified demand for privacy and liberty. The arguement keeps coming back to the same bullshit "If you've got nothing to hide, what's the problem?".

All it takes is one tabloid talking about the evil terrorists coming to get us all and large swaths of the voting public are happy to sign over whatever rights. Similar thing with recent porn laws.

This is the real problem with this country.

Don’t get me wrong, im sure every other country has terrible media that twists the truth to serve the higher ups but here it seems a lot more ingrained than other countries. I mean look at the Sun, that was for a long time considered a British institution amongst the lower classes (Primary targets for news media) and so when they are all beating the same drum of ‘We have to stop the terrorists/paedophiles/enemy of the day no matter what’, the general public believe it.

That’s why I love The Trews with Russell Brand because he is the perfect counter for people who get their news mainly from the papers, breaking down what their true motives/meanings are in ways that a lot of people would never even think to do.

As for the topic at hand, I honestly don’t know what it going to take for this stupid country to wake up and realise we are all going to suffer down the line and once we are there we wont be able to do anything about it.
 

Nokterian

Member
V for Vendetta is coming closer to a reality in the UK. Porn laws,Great firewall of Cameron. Also privacy and freedom of speech? Hell no i am stunned that i do not see people going against this in the UK.
 
I used to think the Blair surveillance state was awful but Cameron is really pushing the boundaries of cuntism. Thank god I left the UK 10 years ago and live somewhere far less intrusive.
 

Nokterian

Member
I used to think the Blair surveillance state was awful but Cameron is really pushing the boundaries of cuntism. Thank god I left the UK 10 years ago and live somewhere far less intrusive.

Even Totalbiscuit and Jim Sterling also a lot of other people from UK can agree with.
 
What a dumbfuck. Taking advantage of what happened to push a political agenda.


Like all good encryption is going to disappear off the internet because the idiots at 10 Downing Street say so.

0% chance of happening.
 

Orbis

Member
Jesus fucking christ. UK gafbros you need to boot this fucker out. He is going to wormtounge Obama into this shit I know it.
Very slim chance of him being Prime Minister as of this May. Most likely election result is a Labour + nationalist coalition government.
 

norinrad

Member
We finally made it George

1984-book-cover-slice.jpg
 

King_Moc

Banned
Urgh, this is so stupid. Even in the unlikely event that the tories are being genuine in saying it's just to help stop those terrorists that haven't attacked us in a decade, they must realise that a government in the future will abuse this power. Much in the same way the they government did with the law that was brought in to allow police to stop anyone that they could reasonable suspect to be a terrorist.
 

tensuke

Member
UK need to get their cheeky big brother attitude away from the US, it's already bad enough here as it is.
 

Izuna

Banned
There are several other amendments he ignores.

Listening to him. Does this mean that even with a warrant Facebook won't give up a way to look into people's accounts?

Doesn't this in a way shift all of this power to facebook themselves, who across a generation if they stayed where they are in the world, would have the information on plots but refuse to share it because of principle and policy?

Honestly his speech couldn't be better other than ignoring the fact that in the past they must have known about someone likely to attack but didn't know the where and how, and even though they could have found out tech companies don't have a way to accept a sort of "probable cause" system.

It's sounds extremely complicated.

David however seems to want to way fuck it and the government should be able to do whatever they want. I think it would be better, perhaps, if tech companies find a way to notify users who were falsely had their privacy invaded notified. The scariest part is when it is not.

If the police came over to my flat and said "someone at this address is thought to have been in communication with a terrorist group" I am sure everyone would want to keep their shit secret but be okay with others being looked at. Well not everyone but you know...

The ability for the government to snoop without a trace is the scary part. Like, do they know the private and intimate conversations I have? The thought of someone else having read them is likely, and that's scary. But I think people shouldn't blindly believe that ultimate privacy must be conserved no matter what 100%, like the internet should be entirely like Tor or something.

We say "good" when those hackers get caught with the DDOS stuff and I'm sure it wasn't just based on tracing a signal back. I think people need to collectively vote on this issue and decide where the line needs to be drawn.

The biggest issue is that this can't be a collective dialogue because if we talk about what the government shouldn't ever be able to find, then extremists will look into that. Which is why Obama is doing his best to convey his point but it sounds unhelpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom