Reply to post: Re: Quid pro quo, Clarice...

GCHQ pushes for 'virtual crocodile clips' on chat apps – the ability to silently slip into private encrypted comms

jmch Silver badge

Re: Quid pro quo, Clarice...

As mentioned in the article, it's a question of trust. GCHQ etc have broken their trust and if they want to rebuild it, more than empty words are required.

In principle I am not against law enforcement having access to the communications of nasty people. BUT they need a warrant that is targeted at a specific person or small group of people, and limited in scope (what they are looking for) and time (limited to a few months and needs to go through full process to reauthorise). Also, to guarantee that the powers are not being abused, the intercept HAS to be done through the 3rd-party service provider (eg Whatsapp) not directly by GCHQ etc, and these providers need to be paid by law enforcement to provide their services, AND most importantly be allowed, nay, required, to publish frequently and in detail how many intercepts they are being asked to make. Plus any other safeguards as may seem necessary including truly independent external oversight and heavy penalties (including jail time) for abusers.

Now, law enforcement might look at that list and say... but that's really restrictive... to which we reply THAT'S THE BLOODY POINT!!!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon