'Black Boxes' to monitor all internet and phone data

[lavacano]

[h2]Put the goddamn country in the thread title.[/h2]

[Irockz]

Oh piss off. Just for you I'm going to script a program that generates furry, fat, slime and scat porn.

Just for you, David Cameron.

Just for you.

[Asiansniper911]

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;36564328]Go ahead and look at my browsing history. I dare you.[/QUOTE]

What browsing history?

[Agni_Kai]

Enjoy looking at what Voremore posts, government.

[Zerokateo]

Why don't we all just put livestreamed webcams linked to the goverment so they can watch everything we do, like underage children watching porn.

[TheDecryptor]

[QUOTE=Tobba;36568218]This isnt how things work

If they intercepted the traffic on a HTTPS connection your browser will flip a fucking shit, how are they planning to do this[/QUOTE]

By strong arming a CA they have control over into giving them either the signing keys, or fake certificates that browsers trust. It happened in Iran not too long ago, after the breach at Diginotar, the Iran government gave themselves SSL certificates for *.google.com and started doing a MITM attack to Gmail users, since browsers trusted Diginotar, they trusted the fake cert and didn't raise a warning of any kind.

There's ways to fight this off (Such as DANE, DNSSEC, TACK, etc.) but they've still not got wide spread deployment. Until lots of sites are using those Convergence (For Firefox) is a good stop-gap measure, but it unfortunately breaks SPDY (Which is useful in it's own right since it uses SSL, so every site using SPDY is fully encrypted)

[AngryChairR]

[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;36587100]By strong arming a CA they have control over into giving them either the signing keys, or fake certificates that browsers trust. It happened in Iran not too long ago, after the breach at Diginotar, the Iran government gave themselves SSL certificates for *.google.com and started doing a MITM attack to Gmail users, since browsers trusted Diginotar, they trusted the fake cert and didn't raise a warning of any kind.

There's ways to fight this off (Such as DANE, DNSSEC, TACK, etc.) but they've still not got wide spread deployment. Until lots of sites are using those Convergence (For Firefox) is a good stop-gap measure, but it unfortunately breaks SPDY (Which is useful in it's own right since it uses SSL, so every site using SPDY is fully encrypted)[/QUOTE]

Technical source for further reading please?

[MarkG06]

Better go back to shouting at each other.

[Lordofdafood]

"The communications data bill is designed to allow the police to maintain their capability to catch criminals and protect the public"

You mean do nothing and use it only on people who could be pirating things? Wouldn't surprise me if the music / film industry has a key part in this

[TheDecryptor]

[QUOTE=AngryChairR;36587777]Technical source for further reading please?[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately there's not one nice consistent source, it's spread out all over the net and in the related bug trackers for browsers.

[URL="http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/gmail/3J3r2JqFNTw"]This[/URL] was the original report about something fishy happening to Gmail users (Caught because Google embed their SSL certificates into Chrome, so it can detect if the SSL cert is changed/intercepted, which is what TACK does in a generic way)