Mass Surveillance

At the eleventh hour of the Online Safety Bill’s passage through Parliament, the Government has found itself claiming to have both conceded that it won’t do anything stupid regarding encrypted messages, and that it may well press ahead with dangerous technologies if it wants to.

Ten years ago, the first revelations about US mass surveillance were published in the UK and USA.

Update on the Parliamentary amendments The Online Safety Bill is back in Parliament.

This week the Online Safety Bill came back to Parliament.

70 organizations, cyber security experts, and elected officials sign open letter expressing dangers of Online Safety Bill On 24 November, seventy civil society organizations, companies, elected officials, and cybersecurity experts, including Global Encryption Coalition members, published an open letter to British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak highlighting their concerns with the threat that the United Kingdom’s Online Safety Bill poses to end-to-end encryption.

The Online Safety Bill Policy Hub is a place for members of the public, campaigners, politicians and experts to take action, and find out more about the issues around the Online Safety Bill.

The deployment of client-side scanning on private messaging systems was trailed in a research paper published by the technical directors of GCHQ and the National Cybersecurity Centre (NCSC).

The Online Safety Act’s spy clause outsources surveillance to messaging apps.

In 2013, following Edward Snowden’s disclosure of information about major national mass surveillance programmes, the Open Rights Group teamed up with Privacy International, English PEN, and Dr Constanze Kurz, a German computer scientist, to mount a legal challenge against the UK Government’s mass surveillance of the internet.

In January 2018, the Court of Appeal delivered judgment in a case regarding the Government’s “Snooper’s Charter” provisions, found in the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, and in the Investigatory Powers Act 2016.