News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Signal's president vows to reject UK law on message scanning before encryption. Parent comment

Re:Signal's president vows to reject UK law on message scann... by Barrin92 on Saturday July 15, 2023 @02:50PM (#36739789)
Given that according to the last question on that survey the public also overwhelmingly (~90%!) supports holding senior managers personally accountable and punishable by law should firms fail to comply I think it's fair to say they want authorities to have the ability to enforce these measures. The GCHQ has nothing to do with it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal's president vows to reject UK law on message scann... by immibis on Monday July 24, 2023 @02:43AM (#36843862)
If you ask people "Should CSAM be caught?" they'll say "yes" because, duh.

If you ask people "Should phones scan their files for CSAM?" a good part will say "yes" because it doesn't sound like it affects anyone outside of child pornographers.

If you ask people "Should phones send your photos to GCHQ to check if they're CSAM?" most people will say "no".

If you ask people "Should phones send your photos to GCHQ to check if they're CSAM, and should we send Apple executives to prison if they don't make their phones do this?" most people will still say "no".

[ Parent | on HN ]